PRO A10-8770E vs Celeron Dual-Core T1600
PRO A10-8770E
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 PRO A10-8770E is positioned at rank 1035 and the Celeron Dual-Core T1600 is on rank 880, so the Celeron Dual-Core T1600 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar PRO A10-8770E
Performance Per Dollar Celeron Dual-Core T1600
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | PRO A10-8770E | Celeron Dual-Core T1600 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ✅ Superior gaming performance | ❌ Lower gaming performance |
| Workstation | ✅ Better multi-core power | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks |
| Price | ⚠️ Higher cost ($210) | ✅ More affordable ($150) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Carrizo (2015−2018) / 28 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Merom (2006−2008) / 65 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | PRO A10-8770E | Celeron Dual-Core T1600 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ✅ Better overall value (+40%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️ Higher cost ($210) | ✅ More affordable ($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 PRO A10-8770E and Celeron Dual-Core T1600
PRO A10-8770E
The PRO A10-8770E is manufactured by AMD. It was released in Outubro 2016 (9 years ago). It is based on the Carrizo (2015−2018) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.8 GHz, with boost up to 3.5 GHz. L2 cache: 2048 kB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: AM4. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2400. Passmark benchmark score: 3,001 points. Launch price was $69.
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 PRO A10-8770E packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Celeron Dual-Core T1600 offers 2 cores / 2 threads — the PRO A10-8770E has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.5 GHz on the PRO A10-8770E versus 1.66 GHz on the Celeron Dual-Core T1600 — a 71.3% clock advantage for the PRO A10-8770E. The PRO A10-8770E uses the Carrizo (2015−2018) architecture (28 nm), while the Celeron Dual-Core T1600 uses Merom (2006−2008) (65 nm). In PassMark, the PRO A10-8770E scores 3,001 against the Celeron Dual-Core T1600's 3,000 — a 0% lead for the PRO A10-8770E.
| Feature | PRO A10-8770E | Celeron Dual-Core T1600 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 4 / 4+100% | 2 / 2 |
| Boost Clock | 3.5 GHz+111% | 1.66 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.8 GHz | — |
| L2 Cache | 2048 kB+100% | 1 MB |
| Process | 28 nm-57% | 65 nm |
| Architecture | Carrizo (2015−2018) | Merom (2006−2008) |
| PassMark | 3,001 | 3,000 |
Memory & Platform
The PRO A10-8770E uses the AM4 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Celeron Dual-Core T1600 uses PGA478 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | PRO A10-8770E | Celeron Dual-Core T1600 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | AM4 | PGA478 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0+173% | PCIe 1.1 |
| Max RAM Speed | — | 667 |
| Max RAM Capacity | — | 4 |
| RAM Channels | — | 2 |
| ECC Support | — | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | — | 0 |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: not specified (PRO A10-8770E) / false (Celeron Dual-Core T1600). Primary use case: Celeron Dual-Core T1600 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron Dual-Core T1600 rivals Pentium T2390.
| Feature | PRO A10-8770E | Celeron Dual-Core T1600 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | — | No |
| Unlocked | — | No |
| AVX-512 | — | No |
| Virtualization | — | false |
| Target Use | — | Budget |
Value Analysis
The PRO A10-8770E launched at $395 MSRP, while the Celeron Dual-Core T1600 debuted at $150. At current prices ($210 vs $150), the Celeron Dual-Core T1600 is $60 cheaper. In terms of value (PassMark points per dollar), the PRO A10-8770E delivers 14.3 pts/$ vs 20.0 pts/$ for the Celeron Dual-Core T1600 — making the Celeron Dual-Core T1600 the 33.3% better value option.
| Feature | PRO A10-8770E | Celeron Dual-Core T1600 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $395 | $150-62% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $210 | $150-29% |
| Performance per Dollar | 14.3 | 20.0+40% |
| Release Date | 2016 | 2008 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on PRO A10-8770E and Celeron Dual-Core T1600
