CPU
GPU
Core i7-3540M
Celeron Dual-Core T1600
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 i7-3540M is positioned at rank 81 and the Celeron Dual-Core T1600 is on rank 880, so the Core i7-3540M offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Core i7-3540M
Performance Per Dollar Celeron Dual-Core T1600
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Core i7-3540M | Celeron Dual-Core T1600 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ✅ Superior gaming performance | ❌ Lower gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | ✅ More affordable ($0) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($150) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) / 22 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Merom (2006−2008) / 65 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Core i7-3540M | Celeron Dual-Core T1600 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅ More affordable ($0) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($150) |
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 i7-3540M and Celeron Dual-Core T1600
Core i7-3540M
The Core i7-3540M is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 8 January 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3 GHz, with boost up to 3.7 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: PGA988. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,984 points. Launch price was $349.
Celeron Dual-Core T1600
The Celeron Dual-Core T1600 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: 1.66 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: PGA478. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Passmark benchmark score: 3,000 points. Launch price was $69.
Processing Power
The Core i7-3540M packs 2 cores / 4 threads, matching the Celeron Dual-Core T1600's 2 cores. Boost clocks reach 3.7 GHz on the Core i7-3540M versus 1.66 GHz on the Celeron Dual-Core T1600 — a 76.1% clock advantage for the Core i7-3540M. The Core i7-3540M uses the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture (22 nm), while the Celeron Dual-Core T1600 uses Merom (2006−2008) (65 nm). In PassMark, the Core i7-3540M scores 2,984 against the Celeron Dual-Core T1600's 3,000 — a 0.5% lead for the Celeron Dual-Core T1600.
| Feature | Core i7-3540M | Celeron Dual-Core T1600 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 4 | 2 / 2 |
| Boost Clock | 3.7 GHz+123% | 1.66 GHz |
| Base Clock | 3 GHz | — |
| L3 Cache | 4 MB (total) | — |
| L2 Cache | 256K (per core) | 1 MB+300% |
| Process | 22 nm-66% | 65 nm |
| Architecture | Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) | Merom (2006−2008) |
| PassMark | 2,984 | 3,000 |
Memory & Platform
The Core i7-3540M uses the PGA988 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Celeron Dual-Core T1600 uses PGA478 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 1600 on the Core i7-3540M versus 667 on the Celeron Dual-Core T1600 — the Core i7-3540M supports 82.3% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Core i7-3540M supports up to 32 of RAM compared to 4 — 155.6% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i7-3540M) vs 0 (Celeron Dual-Core T1600) — the Core i7-3540M offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: HM75,HM76,HM77,QM77,QS77 (Core i7-3540M) and GL40,GM45,GM47,PM45 (Celeron Dual-Core T1600).
| Feature | Core i7-3540M | Celeron Dual-Core T1600 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | PGA988 | PGA478 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0+173% | PCIe 1.1 |
| Max RAM Speed | 1600+140% | 667 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 32+700% | 4 |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 16 | 0 |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: true (Core i7-3540M) vs false (Celeron Dual-Core T1600). The Core i7-3540M includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics 4000), while the Celeron Dual-Core T1600 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron Dual-Core T1600 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Core i7-3540M rivals AMD A10-5750M; Celeron Dual-Core T1600 rivals Pentium T2390.
| Feature | Core i7-3540M | Celeron Dual-Core T1600 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | No |
| IGPU Model | Intel HD Graphics 4000 | — |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | true | false |
| Target Use | — | Budget |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Core i7-3540M and Celeron Dual-Core T1600
