Ultra 9 288V vs Celeron 725C
Primary details
Comparing Celeron 725C and Core Ultra 9 288V processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | 620 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Power efficiency | no data | 38.80 |
| Architecture codename | Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) | Lunar Lake (2024) |
| Release date | 1 July 2011 (13 years ago) | 24 September 2024 (less than a year ago) |
Detailed specifications
Celeron 725C and Core Ultra 9 288V 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 cores | 1 (Single-Core) | 8 (Octa-Core) |
| Threads | 1 | 8 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 3.3 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.3 GHz | 5.1 GHz |
| Bus rate | no data | 37 MHz |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 192 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 256 KB (per core) | 2.5 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 1.5 MB (shared) | 12 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 3 nm |
| Die size | 131 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 100 °C |
| Number of transistors | 504 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron 725C and Core Ultra 9 288V 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 configuration | 1 | 1 |
| Socket | Intel BGA1023 | Intel BGA 2833 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 17 Watt | 30 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 725C and Core Ultra 9 288V. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| TSX | - | + |
Security technologies
Celeron 725C and Core Ultra 9 288V technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron 725C and Core Ultra 9 288V are enumerated here.
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron 725C and Core Ultra 9 288V. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR5 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Intel HD (Sandy Bridge) | Arc 140V |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron 725C and Core Ultra 9 288V.
| PCIe version | no data | 5.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 4 |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 1 July 2011 | 24 September 2024 |
| Physical cores | 1 | 8 |
| Threads | 1 | 8 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 3 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 17 Watt | 30 Watt |
Celeron 725C has 76.5% lower power consumption.
Ultra 9 288V, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 13 years, 700% more physical cores and 700% more threads, and a 966.7% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Celeron 725C and Core Ultra 9 288V. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron 725C and Core Ultra 9 288V, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
