Celeron M 530 vs 1007U

Primary details

Comparing Celeron 1007U and Celeron M 530 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking2847not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel CeleronCeleron M
Power efficiency2.95no data
Architecture codenameIvy Bridge (2012−2013)Merom (2006−2008)
Release date20 January 2013 (11 years ago)no data (2024 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$86no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron 1007U and Celeron M 530 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 speed1.5 GHz1.73 GHz
Boost clock speed1.5 GHz1.73 GHz
Bus typeDMIno data
Bus rate5 GT/s533 MHz
Multiplier15no data
L1 cache64K (per core)no data
L2 cache512 KBno data
L3 cache2 MB (shared)1 MB L2 Cache
Chip lithography22 nm65 nm
Die size118 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature105 °C100 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)105 °Cno data
Number of transistors1,400 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage rangeno data0.95V-1.3V

Compatibility

Information on Celeron 1007U and Celeron M 530 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 configuration1no data
SocketFCBGA1023PBGA479,PPGA478
Power consumption (TDP)17 Watt30 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 1007U and Celeron M 530. 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--
FDI+no data
Fast Memory Access+no data
FSB parityno data-

Security technologies

Celeron 1007U and Celeron M 530 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 1007U and Celeron M 530 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 1007U and Celeron M 530. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3no data
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 1007U and Celeron M 530 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 1007U and Celeron M 530.

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 1007U 839
+178%
Celeron M 530 302

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 1007U 1610
+118%
Celeron M 530 739

Pros & cons summary


Physical cores 2 1
Threads 2 1
Chip lithography 22 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 17 Watt 30 Watt

Celeron 1007U has 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, a 195.5% more advanced lithography process, and 76.5% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Celeron 1007U and Celeron M 530. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron 1007U and Celeron M 530, 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 1007U
Celeron 1007U
Intel Celeron M 530
Celeron M 530

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.


3 124 votes

Rate Celeron 1007U on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 40 votes

Rate Celeron M 530 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron 1007U or Celeron M 530, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.