CPU
GPU
Core 2 Duo E7300
Celeron G1610
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 Core 2 Duo E7300 is positioned at rank 969 and the Celeron G1610 is on rank 531, so the Celeron G1610 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Core 2 Duo E7300
Performance Per Dollar Celeron G1610
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Core 2 Duo E7300 | Celeron G1610 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ❌ Lower gaming performance | ✅ Superior gaming performance |
| Workstation | ✅ Better multi-core power | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks |
| Price | ⚠️ Higher cost ($133) | ✅ More affordable ($5) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Wolfdale (2008−2010) / 45 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) / 22 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Core 2 Duo E7300 | Celeron G1610 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ✅ Better overall value (+2551%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️ Higher cost ($133) | ✅ More affordable ($5) |
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 Core 2 Duo E7300 and Celeron G1610
Core 2 Duo E7300
The Core 2 Duo E7300 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2008-01-01. It is based on the Wolfdale (2008−2010) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.66 GHz, with boost up to 2.67 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 3 MB (total). Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: LGA775. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR1, DDR2, DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,555 points. Launch price was $249.
Celeron G1610
The Celeron G1610 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 3 December 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) 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 22 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1155. Thermal design power (TDP): 55 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,550 points. Launch price was $388.
Processing Power
Both the Core 2 Duo E7300 and Celeron G1610 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.67 GHz on the Core 2 Duo E7300 versus 2.6 GHz on the Celeron G1610 — a 2.7% clock advantage for the Core 2 Duo E7300 (base: 2.66 GHz vs 2.6 GHz). The Core 2 Duo E7300 uses the Wolfdale (2008−2010) architecture (45 nm), while the Celeron G1610 uses Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Core 2 Duo E7300 scores 1,555 against the Celeron G1610's 1,550 — a 0.3% lead for the Core 2 Duo E7300. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 412 vs 456, a 10.1% lead for the Celeron G1610 that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 725 vs 778 (7.1% advantage for the Celeron G1610). L3 cache: 0 kB on the Core 2 Duo E7300 vs 2 MB (total) on the Celeron G1610.
| Feature | Core 2 Duo E7300 | Celeron G1610 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 2 / 2 |
| Boost Clock | 2.67 GHz+3% | 2.6 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.66 GHz+2% | 2.6 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 2 MB (total) |
| L2 Cache | 3 MB (total)+1100% | 256 kB (per core) |
| Process | 45 nm | 22 nm-51% |
| Architecture | Wolfdale (2008−2010) | Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) |
| PassMark | 1,555 | 1,550 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 412 | 456+11% |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 725 | 778+7% |
Memory & Platform
The Core 2 Duo E7300 uses the LGA775 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Celeron G1610 uses LGA1155 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR2-800 on the Core 2 Duo E7300 versus DDR3-1333 on the Celeron G1610 — the Celeron G1610 supports 40% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron G1610 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: P35,G33,G41,P45 (Core 2 Duo E7300) and H61,B75,H77,Z77 (Celeron G1610).
| Feature | Core 2 Duo E7300 | Celeron G1610 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA775 | LGA1155 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 1.1 | PCIe 3.0+173% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR2-800 | DDR3-1333+50% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 8 GB | 32 GB+300% |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ✅ |
| PCIe Lanes | 16 | 16 |
Advanced Features
Only the Core 2 Duo E7300 has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Both support VT-x virtualization. The Celeron G1610 includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge)), while the Core 2 Duo E7300 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core 2 Duo E7300 targets Legacy Desktop, Celeron G1610 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Core 2 Duo E7300 rivals Athlon II X2 245; Celeron G1610 rivals Pentium G2020.
| Feature | Core 2 Duo E7300 | Celeron G1610 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | Yes |
| IGPU Model | None | HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge) |
| Unlocked | Yes | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | VT-x | VT-x |
| Target Use | Legacy Desktop | Budget |
Value Analysis
The Core 2 Duo E7300 launched at $133 MSRP, while the Celeron G1610 debuted at $42. At current prices ($133 vs $5), the Celeron G1610 is $128 cheaper. In terms of value (PassMark points per dollar), the Core 2 Duo E7300 delivers 11.7 pts/$ vs 310.0 pts/$ for the Celeron G1610 — making the Celeron G1610 the 185.5% better value option.
| Feature | Core 2 Duo E7300 | Celeron G1610 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $133 | $42-68% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $133 | $5-96% |
| Performance per Dollar | 11.7 | 310.0+2550% |
| Release Date | 2008 | 2012 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Core 2 Duo E7300 and Celeron G1610
