Apple M3 Max 14-Core vs Celeron Dual-Core T3500
Aggregate performance score
Apple M3 Max 14-Core outperforms Celeron Dual-Core T3500 by a whopping 2761% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Celeron Dual-Core T3500 and Apple M3 Max 14-Core processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2595 | 224 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | Intel Celeron Dual-Core | Apple M3 |
| Power efficiency | 2.18 | 27.94 |
| Architecture codename | Penryn (2008−2011) | no data |
| Release date | 26 September 2010 (14 years ago) | 30 October 2023 (1 year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $80 | no data |
Detailed specifications
Celeron Dual-Core T3500 and Apple M3 Max 14-Core 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 | 2 (Dual-core) | 14 (Tetradeca-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 14 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 2.748 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.1 GHz | 4.06 GHz |
| Bus rate | 800 MHz | no data |
| L1 cache | 128 KB | no data |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | no data |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 3 nm |
| Die size | 107 mm2 | no data |
| Number of transistors | 410 Million | 92000 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron Dual-Core T3500 and Apple M3 Max 14-Core 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.
| Socket | Socket P PGA478 | no data |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 78 Watt |
Security technologies
Celeron Dual-Core T3500 and Apple M3 Max 14-Core technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| EDB | + | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | Apple M3 Max 30-Core GPU |
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.82 | 23.46 |
| Recency | 26 September 2010 | 30 October 2023 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 14 |
| Threads | 2 | 14 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 3 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 78 Watt |
Celeron Dual-Core T3500 has 122.9% lower power consumption.
Apple M3 Max 14-Core, on the other hand, has a 2761% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 13 years, 600% more physical cores and 600% more threads, and a 1400% more advanced lithography process.
The Apple M3 Max 14-Core is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron Dual-Core T3500 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron Dual-Core T3500 and Apple M3 Max 14-Core, 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.
