E2-9000 vs Celeron Dual-Core T1600

VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron Dual-Core T1600
2008
2 cores / 2 threads, 35 Watt
0.60
E2-9000
2016
2 cores / 2 threads, 10 Watt
0.61
+1.7%

E2-9000 outperforms Celeron Dual-Core T1600 by a minimal 2% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron Dual-Core T1600 and E2-9000 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking27912784
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel Celeron Dual-CoreBristol Ridge
Power efficiency1.625.77
Architecture codenameMerom (2006−2008)Stoney Ridge (2016−2019)
Release date1 May 2008 (16 years ago)1 June 2016 (8 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Celeron Dual-Core T1600 and E2-9000 basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.

Physical cores2 (Dual-core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads22
Base clock speedno data1.8 GHz
Boost clock speed1.66 GHz2.2 GHz
Bus rate667 MHzno data
L2 cache1 MB1 MB
Chip lithography65 nm28 nm
Die size143 mm2124.5 mm2
Maximum core temperature100 °C90 °C
Number of transistors291 Million1200 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Celeron Dual-Core T1600 and E2-9000 compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.

SocketPPGA478BGA
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt10 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron Dual-Core T1600 and E2-9000. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataVirtualization,

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron Dual-Core T1600 and E2-9000 are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron Dual-Core T1600 and E2-9000. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR4

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataAMD Radeon R2 (Stoney Ridge)

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

Celeron Dual-Core T1600 0.60
E2-9000 0.61
+1.7%

Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

Celeron Dual-Core T1600 950
E2-9000 967
+1.8%

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

Celeron Dual-Core T1600 3000
+3.6%
E2-9000 2897

3DMark06 CPU

3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.

Celeron Dual-Core T1600 1350
E2-9000 1556
+15.3%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.60 0.61
Recency 1 May 2008 1 June 2016
Chip lithography 65 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 10 Watt

E2-9000 has a 1.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 132.1% more advanced lithography process, and 250% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Celeron Dual-Core T1600 and E2-9000.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron Dual-Core T1600 and E2-9000, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


Intel Celeron Dual-Core T1600
Celeron Dual-Core T1600
AMD E2-9000
E2-9000

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


3.5 13 votes

Rate Celeron Dual-Core T1600 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.5 311 votes

Rate E2-9000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron Dual-Core T1600 or E2-9000, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.