VIA Nano X2 U4025 vs Celeron E1600
VIA Nano X2 U4025
Celeron E1600
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 VIA Nano X2 U4025 is positioned at rank 831 and the Celeron E1600 is on rank 896, so the VIA Nano X2 U4025 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar VIA Nano X2 U4025
Performance Per Dollar Celeron E1600
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | VIA Nano X2 U4025 | Celeron E1600 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ❌ Lower gaming performance | ✅ Superior gaming performance |
| Workstation | ✅ Better multi-core power | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks |
| Price | ✅ More affordable ($0) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($10) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (CNC (2011) / 40 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Allendale (2006−2009) / 65 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | VIA Nano X2 U4025 | Celeron E1600 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅ More affordable ($0) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($10) |
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 VIA Nano X2 U4025 and Celeron E1600
VIA Nano X2 U4025
The VIA Nano X2 U4025 is manufactured by TSMC. It was released in Janeiro 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the CNC (2011) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.2 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 40 nm process technology. Socket: NanoBGA2. Thermal design power (TDP): 13 Watt. Memory support: DDR2, DDR3 Depends on motherboard. Passmark benchmark score: 885 points. Launch price was $69.
Celeron E1600
The Celeron E1600 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Allendale (2006−2009) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.4 GHz, with boost up to 2.4 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB (total). Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: LGA775. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR1, DDR2, DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 815 points. Launch price was $69.
Processing Power
Both the VIA Nano X2 U4025 and Celeron E1600 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 1.2 GHz on the VIA Nano X2 U4025 versus 2.4 GHz on the Celeron E1600 — a 66.7% clock advantage for the Celeron E1600. The VIA Nano X2 U4025 uses the CNC (2011) architecture (40 nm), while the Celeron E1600 uses Allendale (2006−2009) (65 nm). In PassMark, the VIA Nano X2 U4025 scores 885 against the Celeron E1600's 815 — a 8.2% lead for the VIA Nano X2 U4025.
| Feature | VIA Nano X2 U4025 | Celeron E1600 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 2 / 2 |
| Boost Clock | 1.2 GHz | 2.4 GHz+100% |
| Base Clock | — | 2.4 GHz |
| L3 Cache | — | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB (per core)+100% | 512 kB (total) |
| Process | 40 nm-38% | 65 nm |
| Architecture | CNC (2011) | Allendale (2006−2009) |
| PassMark | 885+9% | 815 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | — | 310 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | — | 560 |
Memory & Platform
The VIA Nano X2 U4025 uses the NanoBGA2 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron E1600 uses LGA775 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | VIA Nano X2 U4025 | Celeron E1600 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | NanoBGA2 | LGA775 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 2.0+82% | PCIe 1.1 |
| Max RAM Speed | — | DDR2-800 |
| Max RAM Capacity | — | 8 GB |
| RAM Channels | — | 2 |
| ECC Support | — | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | — | 0 |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: not specified (VIA Nano X2 U4025) / No (Celeron E1600). Primary use case: Celeron E1600 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron E1600 rivals Pentium E2220.
| Feature | VIA Nano X2 U4025 | Celeron E1600 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | — | No |
| Unlocked | — | No |
| AVX-512 | — | No |
| Virtualization | — | No |
| 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 VIA Nano X2 U4025 and Celeron E1600
