Celeron G1610 vs Core 2 Duo E7300
Celeron G1610
Core 2 Duo E7300
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 G1610 is positioned at rank 531 and the Core 2 Duo E7300 is on rank 969, so the Celeron G1610 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Celeron G1610
Performance Per Dollar Core 2 Duo E7300
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Celeron G1610 | Core 2 Duo E7300 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ✅ Superior gaming performance | ❌ Lower gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | ✅ More affordable ($5) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($133) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) / 22 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Wolfdale (2008−2010) / 45 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Celeron G1610 | Core 2 Duo E7300 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅ Better overall value (+2551%) | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅ More affordable ($5) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($133) |
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 G1610 and Core 2 Duo E7300
Celeron G1610
The Celeron G1610 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 3 December 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.6 GHz, with boost up to 2.6 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1155. Thermal design power (TDP): 55 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,550 points. Launch price was $388.
Core 2 Duo E7300
The Core 2 Duo E7300 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2008-01-01. It is based on the Wolfdale (2008−2010) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.66 GHz, with boost up to 2.67 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 3 MB (total). Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: LGA775. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR1, DDR2, DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,555 points. Launch price was $249.
Processing Power
Both the Celeron G1610 and Core 2 Duo E7300 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.6 GHz on the Celeron G1610 versus 2.67 GHz on the Core 2 Duo E7300 — a 2.7% clock advantage for the Core 2 Duo E7300 (base: 2.6 GHz vs 2.66 GHz). The Celeron G1610 uses the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture (22 nm), while the Core 2 Duo E7300 uses Wolfdale (2008−2010) (45 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron G1610 scores 1,550 against the Core 2 Duo E7300's 1,555 — a 0.3% lead for the Core 2 Duo E7300. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 456 vs 412, a 10.1% lead for the Celeron G1610 that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 778 vs 725 (7.1% advantage for the Celeron G1610). L3 cache: 2 MB (total) on the Celeron G1610 vs 0 kB on the Core 2 Duo E7300.
| Feature | Celeron G1610 | Core 2 Duo E7300 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 2 / 2 |
| Boost Clock | 2.6 GHz | 2.67 GHz+3% |
| Base Clock | 2.6 GHz | 2.66 GHz+2% |
| L3 Cache | 2 MB (total) | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 256 kB (per core) | 3 MB (total)+1100% |
| Process | 22 nm-51% | 45 nm |
| Architecture | Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) | Wolfdale (2008−2010) |
| PassMark | 1,550 | 1,555 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 456+11% | 412 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 778+7% | 725 |
Memory & Platform
The Celeron G1610 uses the LGA1155 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core 2 Duo E7300 uses LGA775 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1333 on the Celeron G1610 versus DDR2-800 on the Core 2 Duo E7300 — the Celeron G1610 supports 40% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron G1610 supports up to 32 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 120% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 16 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: H61,B75,H77,Z77 (Celeron G1610) and P35,G33,G41,P45 (Core 2 Duo E7300).
| Feature | Celeron G1610 | Core 2 Duo E7300 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1155 | LGA775 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0+173% | PCIe 1.1 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR3-1333+50% | DDR2-800 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 32 GB+300% | 8 GB |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | ✅ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 16 | 16 |
Advanced Features
Only the Core 2 Duo E7300 has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Both support VT-x virtualization. The Celeron G1610 includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge)), while the Core 2 Duo E7300 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron G1610 targets Budget, Core 2 Duo E7300 targets Legacy Desktop. Direct competitor: Celeron G1610 rivals Pentium G2020; Core 2 Duo E7300 rivals Athlon II X2 245.
| Feature | Celeron G1610 | Core 2 Duo E7300 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | No |
| IGPU Model | HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge) | None |
| Unlocked | No | Yes |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | VT-x | VT-x |
| Target Use | Budget | Legacy Desktop |
Value Analysis
The Celeron G1610 launched at $42 MSRP, while the Core 2 Duo E7300 debuted at $133. At current prices ($5 vs $133), the Celeron G1610 is $128 cheaper. In terms of value (PassMark points per dollar), the Celeron G1610 delivers 310.0 pts/$ vs 11.7 pts/$ for the Core 2 Duo E7300 — making the Celeron G1610 the 185.5% better value option.
| Feature | Celeron G1610 | Core 2 Duo E7300 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $42-68% | $133 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $5-96% | $133 |
| Performance per Dollar | 310.0+2550% | 11.7 |
| Release Date | 2012 | 2008 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Celeron G1610 and Core 2 Duo E7300
