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.

Celeron G5905T vs Core m7-6Y75 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Celeron G5905T vs Core m7-6Y75: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

Celeron G5905T

2020

Why buy it

✅Costs $343 less on MSRP ($50 MSRP vs $393 MSRP).
✅Delivers 683.7% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 47.1 vs 6.0 PassMark/$ ($50 MSRP vs $393 MSRP).
✅Draws 35W instead of 512W, a 477W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics 610, while Core m7-6Y75 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (2,356 vs 2,363).

Core m7-6Y75

2015

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 6.0 vs 47.1 PassMark/$ ($393 MSRP vs $50 MSRP).
❌1362.9% higher power demand at 512W vs 35W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron G5905T can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Core m7-6Y75 better than Celeron G5905T?

Yes. Core m7-6Y75 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 1.5% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 0.3% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Core m7-6Y75 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 1.5% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core m7-6Y75 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.3% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 4 threads.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Core m7-6Y75 is still the better call for a fresh build. Core m7-6Y75 comes in 686.0% more expensive on MSRP at $393 MSRP versus $50 MSRP, and it still gives you a 1.5% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Celeron G5905T only looks stronger on raw value math because it is so cheap, but its absolute performance tier is too low to be the better recommendation now. At roughly 2,356 PassMark with 2 cores and 2 threads, it only really makes sense as a bare-minimum stopgap or a very constrained existing-platform upgrade.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Celeron G5905T makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2020 vs 2015). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Celeron G5905T vs Core m7-6Y75 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Celeron G5905T

The Celeron G5905T is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency: 3.3 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB Intel® Smart Cache. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1200. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2666. Passmark benchmark score: 2,356 points. Launch price was $69.

Core m7-6Y75

The Core m7-6Y75 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 September 2015 (10 years ago). It is based on the Skylake-Y (2015) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.2 GHz, with boost up to 3.1 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1515. Thermal design power (TDP): 4.5 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,363 points. Launch price was $393.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron G5905T packs 2 cores / 2 threads, matching the Core m7-6Y75's 2 cores. The Core m7-6Y75 is built on the Skylake-Y (2015) architecture. In PassMark, the Celeron G5905T scores 2,356 against the Core m7-6Y75's 2,363 — a 0.3% lead for the Core m7-6Y75. L3 cache: 4 MB Intel® Smart Cache on the Celeron G5905T vs 4 MB (total) on the Core m7-6Y75.

Feature	Celeron G5905T	Core m7-6Y75
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 4
Boost Clock	—	3.1 GHz
Base Clock	3.3 GHz+175%	1.2 GHz
L3 Cache	4 MB Intel® Smart Cache	4 MB (total)
L2 Cache	—	256 kB (per core)
Process	14 nm	14 nm
Architecture	—	Skylake-Y (2015)
PassMark	2,356	2,363
Geekbench 6 Single	748	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	750	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron G5905T uses the LGA1200 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core m7-6Y75 uses FCBGA1515 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Celeron G5905T	Core m7-6Y75
Socket	LGA1200	FCBGA1515
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2666	—
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	Yes	—
PCIe Lanes	16	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x (Celeron G5905T) / not specified (Core m7-6Y75). The Celeron G5905T includes integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 610), while the Core m7-6Y75 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron G5905T targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron G5905T rivals Pentium Gold G6405T.

Feature	Celeron G5905T	Core m7-6Y75
Integrated GPU	Yes	—
IGPU Model	UHD Graphics 610	—
Unlocked	No	—
AVX-512	No	—
Virtualization	VT-x	—
Target Use	Budget	—

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Celeron G5905T was priced at $50, while the Core m7-6Y75 came in at $393. On launch pricing ($50 vs $393), Celeron G5905T was $343 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Celeron G5905T delivers 47.1 pts/$ vs 6.0 pts/$ for the Core m7-6Y75 — making the Celeron G5905T the 154.7% better value option.

Feature	Celeron G5905T	Core m7-6Y75
MSRP	$50-87%	$393
Performance per Dollar	47.1+685%	6.0
Release Date	2020	2015

Search Celeron G5905T on Amazon

Search Core m7-6Y75 on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.