Celeron 1000M vs Core 2 Duo E6600

VS

Aggregate performance score

Core 2 Duo E6600
2006
2 cores / 2 threads, 65 Watt
0.58
Celeron 1000M
2013
2 cores / 2 threads, 35 Watt
0.67
+15.5%

Celeron 1000M outperforms Core 2 Duo E6600 by a moderate 16% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core 2 Duo (Desktop) E6600 and Celeron 1000M processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking28222746
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
SeriesCore 2 Duo (Desktop)Intel Celeron
Power efficiency0.841.81
Architecture codenameConroe (2006−2007)Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)
Release dateno data20 January 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$86

Detailed specifications

Core 2 Duo (Desktop) E6600 and Celeron 1000M 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 speed2.4 GHz1.8 GHz
Bus rate1066 MHz5 GT/s
L1 cache64 KB64K (per core)
L2 cache4 MB256K (per core)
L3 cache0 KB2 MB (shared)
Chip lithography65 nm22 nm
Die size143 mm2118 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data105 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data105 °C
Number of transistors291 million1,400 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Core 2 Duo (Desktop) E6600 and Celeron 1000M 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.

Number of CPUs in a configuration11
Socket775FCPGA988
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Duo (Desktop) E6600 and Celeron 1000M. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
My WiFino data-
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Flex Memory Accessno data+
Demand Based Switchingno data-
FDIno data+
Fast Memory Accessno data+

Security technologies

Core 2 Duo (Desktop) E6600 and Celeron 1000M technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
EDBno data+
Anti-Theftno data-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core 2 Duo (Desktop) E6600 and Celeron 1000M are enumerated here.

VT-dno data-
VT-xno data+
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core 2 Duo (Desktop) E6600 and Celeron 1000M. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR1, DDR2, DDR3DDR3
Maximum memory sizeno data32 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
Maximum memory bandwidthno data25.6 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataIntel HD Graphics for 3rd Generation Intel Processors
Graphics max frequencyno data1 GHz

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Core 2 Duo (Desktop) E6600 and Celeron 1000M integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data3
eDPno data+
DisplayPort-+
HDMI-+
SDVOno data+
CRTno data+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core 2 Duo (Desktop) E6600 and Celeron 1000M.

PCIe versionno data2.0
PCI Express lanesno data16

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.

Core 2 Duo E6600 0.58
Celeron 1000M 0.67
+15.5%

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.

Core 2 Duo E6600 919
Celeron 1000M 1069
+16.3%

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

Core 2 Duo E6600 261
Celeron 1000M 296
+13.4%

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

Core 2 Duo E6600 421
Celeron 1000M 509
+20.9%

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

Core 2 Duo E6600 2462
Celeron 1000M 2480
+0.7%

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.

Core 2 Duo E6600 4698
Celeron 1000M 4757
+1.3%

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.

Core 2 Duo E6600 2052
+6.7%
Celeron 1000M 1923

wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

Core 2 Duo E6600 36.2
+15%
Celeron 1000M 41.63

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.

Core 2 Duo E6600 1
Celeron 1000M 1
+8.1%

TrueCrypt AES

TrueCrypt is a discontinued piece of software that was widely used for on-the-fly-encryption of disk partitions, now superseded by VeraCrypt. It contains several embedded performance tests, one of them being TrueCrypt AES, which measures data encryption speed using AES algorithm. Result is encryption speed in gigabytes per second.

Core 2 Duo E6600 0.2
+6.3%
Celeron 1000M 0.2

WinRAR 4.0

WinRAR 4.0 is an outdated version of a popular file archiver. It contains an internal speed test, using 'Best' setting of RAR compression on large chunks of randomly generated data. Its results are measured in kilobytes per second.

Core 2 Duo E6600 1173
Celeron 1000M 1285
+9.5%

x264 encoding pass 2

x264 Pass 2 is a slower variant of x264 video compression that produces a variable bit rate output file, which results in better quality since the higher bit rate is used when it is needed more. Benchmark result is still measured in frames per second.  

Core 2 Duo E6600 8
Celeron 1000M 8
+7.2%

x264 encoding pass 1

x264 version 4.0 is a video encoding benchmark uses MPEG 4 x264 compression method to compress a sample HD (720p) video. Pass 1 is a faster variant that produces a constant bit rate output file. Its result is measured in frames per second, which means how many frames of the source video file were encoded per second.  

Core 2 Duo E6600 43
Celeron 1000M 47
+10.4%

Geekbench 2

Core 2 Duo E6600 2898
Celeron 1000M 3405
+17.5%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.58 0.67
Chip lithography 65 nm 22 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 35 Watt

Celeron 1000M has a 15.5% higher aggregate performance score, a 195.5% more advanced lithography process, and 85.7% lower power consumption.

The Celeron 1000M is our recommended choice as it beats the Core 2 Duo E6600 in performance tests.

Note that Core 2 Duo E6600 is a desktop processor while Celeron 1000M is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Duo E6600 and Celeron 1000M, 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 Core 2 Duo E6600
Core 2 Duo E6600
Intel Celeron 1000M
Celeron 1000M

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.


3.2 438 votes

Rate Core 2 Duo E6600 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 166 votes

Rate Celeron 1000M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core 2 Duo E6600 or Celeron 1000M, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.