Celeron E1600 vs VIA Nano X2 U4025
Celeron E1600
VIA Nano X2 U4025
Performance Spectrum - CPU
About PassMark
PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (PassMark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The Celeron E1600 is positioned at rank 896 and the VIA Nano X2 U4025 is on rank 831, so the VIA Nano X2 U4025 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Celeron E1600
Performance Per Dollar VIA Nano X2 U4025
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Celeron E1600 | VIA Nano X2 U4025 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ✅ Superior gaming performance | ❌ Lower gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | ⚠️ Higher cost ($10) | ✅ More affordable ($0) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Allendale (2006−2009) / 65 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (CNC (2011) / 40 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Celeron E1600 | VIA Nano X2 U4025 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️ Higher cost ($10) | ✅ More affordable ($0) |
Performance Check
To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.
Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Celeron E1600 and VIA Nano X2 U4025
Celeron E1600
The Celeron E1600 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Allendale (2006−2009) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.4 GHz, with boost up to 2.4 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB (total). Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: LGA775. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR1, DDR2, DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 815 points. Launch price was $69.
VIA Nano X2 U4025
The VIA Nano X2 U4025 is manufactured by TSMC. It was released in Janeiro 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the CNC (2011) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.2 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 40 nm process technology. Socket: NanoBGA2. Thermal design power (TDP): 13 Watt. Memory support: DDR2, DDR3 Depends on motherboard. Passmark benchmark score: 885 points. Launch price was $69.
Processing Power
Both the Celeron E1600 and VIA Nano X2 U4025 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.4 GHz on the Celeron E1600 versus 1.2 GHz on the VIA Nano X2 U4025 — a 66.7% clock advantage for the Celeron E1600. The Celeron E1600 uses the Allendale (2006−2009) architecture (65 nm), while the VIA Nano X2 U4025 uses CNC (2011) (40 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron E1600 scores 815 against the VIA Nano X2 U4025's 885 — a 8.2% lead for the VIA Nano X2 U4025.
| Feature | Celeron E1600 | VIA Nano X2 U4025 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 2 / 2 |
| Boost Clock | 2.4 GHz+100% | 1.2 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.4 GHz | — |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | — |
| L2 Cache | 512 kB (total) | 1 MB (per core)+100% |
| Process | 65 nm | 40 nm-38% |
| Architecture | Allendale (2006−2009) | CNC (2011) |
| PassMark | 815 | 885+9% |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 310 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 560 | — |
Memory & Platform
The Celeron E1600 uses the LGA775 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the VIA Nano X2 U4025 uses NanoBGA2 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | Celeron E1600 | VIA Nano X2 U4025 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA775 | NanoBGA2 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 1.1 | PCIe 2.0+82% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR2-800 | — |
| Max RAM Capacity | 8 GB | — |
| RAM Channels | 2 | — |
| ECC Support | ❌ | — |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | — |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: No (Celeron E1600) / not specified (VIA Nano X2 U4025). Primary use case: Celeron E1600 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron E1600 rivals Pentium E2220.
| Feature | Celeron E1600 | VIA Nano X2 U4025 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | — |
| Unlocked | No | — |
| AVX-512 | No | — |
| Virtualization | No | — |
| Target Use | Budget | — |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Celeron E1600 and VIA Nano X2 U4025
