Celeron N2940 vs Celeron Dual-Core T1700
Celeron N2940
Celeron Dual-Core T1700
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 N2940 is positioned at rank 1085 and the Celeron Dual-Core T1700 is on rank 769, so the Celeron Dual-Core T1700 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Celeron N2940
Performance Per Dollar Celeron Dual-Core T1700
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Celeron N2940 | Celeron Dual-Core T1700 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ✅ Superior gaming performance | ❌ Lower gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | Equivalent pricing | Equivalent pricing |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) / 22 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Merom (2006−2008) / 65 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Celeron N2940 | Celeron Dual-Core T1700 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | Equivalent pricing | Equivalent pricing |
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 N2940 and Celeron Dual-Core T1700
Celeron N2940
The Celeron N2940 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.83 GHz, with boost up to 2.25 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1170. Thermal design power (TDP): 7.5 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,054 points. Launch price was $69.
Celeron Dual-Core T1700
The Celeron Dual-Core T1700 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Merom (2006−2008) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.83 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: PGA478. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Passmark benchmark score: 1,058 points. Launch price was $69.
Processing Power
The Celeron N2940 packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Celeron Dual-Core T1700 offers 2 cores / 2 threads — the Celeron N2940 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.25 GHz on the Celeron N2940 versus 1.83 GHz on the Celeron Dual-Core T1700 — a 20.6% clock advantage for the Celeron N2940. The Celeron N2940 uses the Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) architecture (22 nm), while the Celeron Dual-Core T1700 uses Merom (2006−2008) (65 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron N2940 scores 1,054 against the Celeron Dual-Core T1700's 1,058 — a 0.4% lead for the Celeron Dual-Core T1700.
| Feature | Celeron N2940 | Celeron Dual-Core T1700 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 4 / 4+100% | 2 / 2 |
| Boost Clock | 2.25 GHz+23% | 1.83 GHz |
| Base Clock | 1.83 GHz | — |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | — |
| L2 Cache | 512K (per core) | 1 MB+100% |
| Process | 22 nm-66% | 65 nm |
| Architecture | Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) | Merom (2006−2008) |
| PassMark | 1,054 | 1,058 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 240 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 850 | — |
Memory & Platform
The Celeron N2940 uses the FCBGA1170 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron Dual-Core T1700 uses PGA478 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3L-1333 on the Celeron N2940 versus DDR2-667 on the Celeron Dual-Core T1700 — the Celeron N2940 supports 40% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron N2940 supports up to 8 GB of RAM compared to 4 GB — 66.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 4 (Celeron N2940) vs 0 (Celeron Dual-Core T1700) — the Celeron N2940 offers 4 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: SoC (Celeron N2940) and GL40,GM45 (Celeron Dual-Core T1700).
| Feature | Celeron N2940 | Celeron Dual-Core T1700 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | FCBGA1170 | PGA478 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 2.0+82% | PCIe 1.1 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR3L-1333+50% | DDR2-667 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 8 GB+100% | 4 GB |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 4 | 0 |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x (Celeron N2940) vs No (Celeron Dual-Core T1700). The Celeron N2940 includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail)), while the Celeron Dual-Core T1700 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron N2940 targets Budget Laptop, Celeron Dual-Core T1700 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron N2940 rivals AMD A6-6310; Celeron Dual-Core T1700 rivals Pentium T2390.
| Feature | Celeron N2940 | Celeron Dual-Core T1700 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | No |
| IGPU Model | Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail) | — |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | VT-x | No |
| Target Use | Budget Laptop | 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 N2940 and Celeron Dual-Core T1700
