Solo T1350 vs Celeron 1000M

Primary details

Comparing Celeron 1000M and Core Solo T1350 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking2723not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel CeleronCore Solo
Power efficiency1.82no data
Architecture codenameIvy Bridge (2012−2013)Yonah (2005−2006)
Release date20 January 2013 (11 years ago)January 2006 (18 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$86no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron 1000M and Core Solo T1350 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)1 (Single-Core)
Threads21
Base clock speed1.8 GHz1.86 GHz
Boost clock speed1.8 GHz1.86 GHz
Bus rate5 GT/s533 MHz
L1 cache64K (per core)64 KB
L2 cache256K (per core)2 MB
L3 cache2 MB (shared)0 KB
Chip lithography22 nm65 nm
Die size118 mm290 mm2
Maximum core temperature105 °C100 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)105 °Cno data
Number of transistors1,400 million151 million
64 bit support+-
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage rangeno data0.95V-1.262V

Compatibility

Information on Celeron 1000M and Core Solo T1350 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
SocketFCPGA988PPGA478
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt31 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 1000M and Core Solo T1350. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2no data
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
My WiFi-no data
Turbo Boost Technology--
Hyper-Threading Technology--
Idle States+-
Thermal Monitoring+-
Flex Memory Access+no data
Demand Based Switching--
PAEno data32 Bit
FDI+no data
Fast Memory Access+no data
FSB parityno data-

Security technologies

Celeron 1000M and Core Solo T1350 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT--
EDB++
Anti-Theft-no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron 1000M and Core Solo T1350 are enumerated here.

VT-d-no data
VT-x+-
EPT+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron 1000M and Core Solo T1350. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR1
Maximum memory size32 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidth25.6 GB/sno data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel® HD Graphics for 3rd Generation Intel® Processorsno data
Graphics max frequency1 GHzno data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron 1000M and Core Solo T1350 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported3no data
eDP+no data
DisplayPort+-
HDMI+-
SDVO+no data
CRT+no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron 1000M and Core Solo T1350.

PCIe version2.0no data
PCI Express lanes16no data

Synthetic benchmark performance

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



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 1000M 1069
+451%
Solo T1350 194

Pros & cons summary


Physical cores 2 1
Threads 2 1
Chip lithography 22 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 31 Watt

Celeron 1000M has 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and a 195.5% more advanced lithography process.

Solo T1350, on the other hand, has 12.9% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Celeron 1000M and Core Solo T1350. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron 1000M and Core Solo T1350, 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 1000M
Celeron 1000M
Intel Core Solo T1350
Core Solo T1350

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.


2.9 164 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 6 votes

Rate Core Solo T1350 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron 1000M or Core Solo T1350, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.