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 T3000 vs Pentium Dual-Core E2160 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 T3000 vs Pentium Dual-Core E2160: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron T3000

2009

Why buy it

✅Draws 35W instead of 65W, a 30W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 6.0 vs 10.4 PassMark/$ ($150 MSRP vs $84 MSRP).

Pentium Dual-Core E2160

2007

Why buy it

✅Costs $66 less on MSRP ($84 MSRP vs $150 MSRP).
✅Delivers 72.7% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 10.4 vs 6.0 PassMark/$ ($84 MSRP vs $150 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (875 vs 905).
❌85.7% higher power demand at 65W vs 35W.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron T3000 better than Pentium Dual-Core E2160?

Yes. Celeron T3000 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 2.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 3.4% 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, Celeron T3000 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 2.8% 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, Celeron T3000 is the stronger fit. You are getting 3.4% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Celeron T3000 is still the much better call for a fresh build. Celeron T3000 comes in 78.6% more expensive on MSRP at $150 MSRP versus $84 MSRP, and it still gives you a 2.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Pentium Dual-Core E2160 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2007 platform. Even with 72.7% better value on paper (10.4 vs 6.0 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on LGA775.

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

Celeron T3000 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2009 vs 2007) and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 2 threads instead of 2/2. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Celeron T3000 vs Pentium Dual-Core E2160 Technical Specifications

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

Celeron T3000

The Celeron T3000 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency: 1.8 GHz. L3 cache: 1 MB L2 Cache. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: PGA478. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 905 points. Launch price was $69.

Pentium Dual-Core E2160

The Pentium Dual-Core E2160 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the NetBurst (2000−2006) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.8 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB (total). Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: LGA775. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR1, DDR2, DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 875 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Celeron T3000 and Pentium Dual-Core E2160 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. The Pentium Dual-Core E2160 is built on the NetBurst (2000−2006) architecture. In PassMark, the Celeron T3000 scores 905 against the Pentium Dual-Core E2160's 875 — a 3.4% lead for the Celeron T3000. L3 cache: 1 MB L2 Cache on the Celeron T3000 vs 0 kB on the Pentium Dual-Core E2160.

Feature	Celeron T3000	Pentium Dual-Core E2160
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	—	1.8 GHz
Base Clock	1.8 GHz	—
L3 Cache	1 MB L2 Cache	0 kB
L2 Cache	—	1 MB (total)
Process	45 nm-31%	65 nm
Architecture	—	NetBurst (2000−2006)
PassMark	905+3%	875

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron T3000 uses the PGA478 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Pentium Dual-Core E2160 uses LGA775 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Celeron T3000	Pentium Dual-Core E2160
Socket	PGA478	LGA775
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0+82%	PCIe 1.1

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Celeron T3000 was priced at $150, while the Pentium Dual-Core E2160 came in at $84. On launch pricing ($150 vs $84), Pentium Dual-Core E2160 was $66 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Celeron T3000 delivers 6.0 pts/$ vs 10.4 pts/$ for the Pentium Dual-Core E2160 — making the Pentium Dual-Core E2160 the 53.3% better value option.

Feature	Celeron T3000	Pentium Dual-Core E2160
MSRP	$150	$84-44%
Performance per Dollar	6.0	10.4+73%
Release Date	2009	2007

Search Celeron T3000 on Amazon

Search Pentium Dual-Core E2160 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.