Celeron T1600 vs E1-2200

Celeron T1600 vs E1-2200 Performance Spectrum

Celeron T1600

715

0.0%

Mobile Pentium 4 2.66

802

+12.2%

Athlon XP 3200+

Athlon 64 3300+

Mobile Athlon 64 3700+

Athlon 64 FX-55

Ryzen 7 4700G

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

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.

Celeron T1600 vs E1-2200 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 T1600 vs E1-2200: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron T1600

2008

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than E1-2200 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (715 vs 802).
❌Launch MSRP is still $107 MSRP, while E1-2200 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌288.9% higher power demand at 35W vs 9W.

E1-2200

2013

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +11.0% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 9W instead of 35W, a 26W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.

Quick Answers

So, is E1-2200 better than Celeron T1600?

Yes. E1-2200 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 11.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 12.2% better PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, E1-2200 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 11.0% 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, E1-2200 is the stronger fit. You are getting 12.2% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

E1-2200 is still the much better call for a fresh build. E1-2200 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $107 MSRP, and it still gives you a 11.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Celeron T1600 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2008 platform. Even with 100.0% better value on paper (6.7 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on PGA478.

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

E1-2200 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2013 vs 2008). That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Celeron T1600 vs E1-2200 Technical Specifications

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

Celeron T1600

The Celeron T1600 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. Base frequency: 1.66 GHz. L3 cache: 1 MB L2 Cache. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: PGA478. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 715 points. Launch price was $69.

E1-2200

The E1-2200 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Kabini (2013−2014) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.05 GHz. L2 cache: 1024 kB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: FT3. Thermal design power (TDP): 9 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 802 points. Launch price was $50.

⚡

Processing Power

The E1-2200 is built on the Kabini (2013−2014) architecture. In PassMark, the Celeron T1600 scores 715 against the E1-2200's 802 — a 11.5% lead for the E1-2200.

Feature	Celeron T1600	E1-2200
Cores / Threads	—	2 / 2
Boost Clock	—	1.05 GHz
Base Clock	1.66 GHz	—
L3 Cache	1 MB L2 Cache	—
L2 Cache	—	1024 kB
Process	65 nm	28 nm-57%
Architecture	—	Kabini (2013−2014)
PassMark	715	802+12%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron T1600 uses the PGA478 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the E1-2200 uses FT3 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.