Celeron G550 vs Core i7-660UM
Celeron G550
Core i7-660UM
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 G550 is positioned at rank 698 and the Core i7-660UM is on rank 1225, so the Celeron G550 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Celeron G550
Performance Per Dollar Core i7-660UM
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Celeron G550 | Core i7-660UM |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ✅ Superior gaming performance | ❌ Lower gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | ✅ More affordable ($15) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($317) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) / 32 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Arrandale (2010−2011) / 32 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Celeron G550 | Core i7-660UM |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅ Better overall value (+2007%) | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅ More affordable ($15) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($317) |
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 G550 and Core i7-660UM
Celeron G550
The Celeron G550 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 June 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) 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 32 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1155. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,275 points. Launch price was $80.
Core i7-660UM
The Core i7-660UM is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 24 May 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Arrandale (2010−2011) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.33 GHz, with boost up to 2.4 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1288. Thermal design power (TDP): 18 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-800. Passmark benchmark score: 1,279 points. Launch price was $317.
Processing Power
The Celeron G550 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, matching the Core i7-660UM's 2 cores. Boost clocks reach 2.6 GHz on the Celeron G550 versus 2.4 GHz on the Core i7-660UM — a 8% clock advantage for the Celeron G550 (base: 2.6 GHz vs 1.33 GHz). The Celeron G550 uses the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture (32 nm), while the Core i7-660UM uses Arrandale (2010−2011) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron G550 scores 1,275 against the Core i7-660UM's 1,279 — a 0.3% lead for the Core i7-660UM. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 379 vs 250, a 41% lead for the Celeron G550 that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 663 vs 600 (10% advantage for the Celeron G550). L3 cache: 2 MB (total) on the Celeron G550 vs 4 MB (total) on the Core i7-660UM.
| Feature | Celeron G550 | Core i7-660UM |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 2 / 4 |
| Boost Clock | 2.6 GHz+8% | 2.4 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.6 GHz+95% | 1.33 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 2 MB (total) | 4 MB (total)+100% |
| L2 Cache | 256 kB (per core) | 256 kB (per core) |
| Process | 32 nm | 32 nm |
| Architecture | Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) | Arrandale (2010−2011) |
| PassMark | 1,275 | 1,279 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 379+52% | 250 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 663+11% | 600 |
Memory & Platform
The Celeron G550 uses the LGA1155 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Core i7-660UM uses BGA1288 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR3-1066 memory speed. The Celeron G550 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,B65,H67,Z68 (Celeron G550) and PM55,HM55,QM57,HM57 (Core i7-660UM).
| Feature | Celeron G550 | Core i7-660UM |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1155 | BGA1288 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 2.0 | PCIe 2.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR3-1066 | DDR3-1066 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 32 GB+300% | 8 GB |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 16 | 16 |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x (Celeron G550) vs VT-x, VT-d (Core i7-660UM). Both include integrated graphics — HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) (Celeron G550) and HD Graphics (Core i7-660UM) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron G550 targets Budget, Core i7-660UM targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron G550 rivals Pentium G630.
| Feature | Celeron G550 | Core i7-660UM |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | Yes |
| IGPU Model | HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) | HD Graphics |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | VT-x | VT-x, VT-d |
| Target Use | Budget | Budget |
Value Analysis
The Celeron G550 launched at $52 MSRP, while the Core i7-660UM debuted at $317.
| Feature | Celeron G550 | Core i7-660UM |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $52-84% | $317 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $15 | — |
| Release Date | 2012 | 2010 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Celeron G550 and Core i7-660UM
