Ultra 7 265K vs Celeron E1500

VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron E1500
2008
2 cores / 2 threads, 65 Watt
0.39
Core Ultra 7 265K
2024
20 cores / 20 threads, 125 Watt
37.13
+9421%

Core Ultra 7 265K outperforms Celeron E1500 by a whopping 9421% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron E1500 and Core Ultra 7 265K processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking301288
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data94.18
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Power efficiency0.5627.96
Architecture codenameAllendale (2006−2009)Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025)
Release dateNovember 2008 (16 years ago)24 October 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$63$394

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron E1500 and Core Ultra 7 265K 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)20 (Icosa-Core)
Threads220
Base clock speed2.2 GHz3.9 GHz
Boost clock speed2.2 GHz5.5 GHz
L1 cache64 KB (per core)112 KB (per core)
L2 cache512 KB (shared)3 MB (per core)
L3 cache0 KB30 MB (shared)
Chip lithography65 nm3 nm
Die size77 mm2243 mm2
Maximum core temperature73 °Cno data
Number of transistors105 million17,800 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data
Unlocked multiplier-+
VID voltage range0.85V-1.5Vno data

Compatibility

Information on Celeron E1500 and Core Ultra 7 265K 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
SocketLGA7751851
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt125 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron E1500 and Core Ultra 7 265K. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI-+
AVX-+
vProno data+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
TSX-+
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
SIPP-+
Demand Based Switching-no data
FSB parity-no data

Security technologies

Celeron E1500 and Core Ultra 7 265K technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-+
EDB+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron E1500 and Core Ultra 7 265K are enumerated here.

VT-d-+
VT-x-+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron E1500 and Core Ultra 7 265K. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR1, DDR2, DDR3DDR5 Depends on motherboard

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataArc Xe2 Graphics 64EU

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron E1500 and Core Ultra 7 265K.

PCIe versionno data5.0
PCI Express lanesno data20

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.

Celeron E1500 0.39
Ultra 7 265K 37.13
+9421%

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 E1500 626
Ultra 7 265K 58974
+9321%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.39 37.13
Physical cores 2 20
Threads 2 20
Chip lithography 65 nm 3 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 125 Watt

Celeron E1500 has 92.3% lower power consumption.

Ultra 7 265K, on the other hand, has a 9420.5% higher aggregate performance score, 900% more physical cores and 900% more threads, and a 2066.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Core Ultra 7 265K is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron E1500 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron E1500 and Core Ultra 7 265K, 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 E1500
Celeron E1500
Intel Core Ultra 7 265K
Core Ultra 7 265K

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 49 votes

Rate Celeron E1500 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 81 vote

Rate Core Ultra 7 265K on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron E1500 or Core Ultra 7 265K, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.