Ultra 9 285 vs Celeron M 310

VS

Primary details

Comparing Celeron M 310 and Core Ultra 9 285 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the rankingnot ratednot rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesCeleron Mno data
Architecture codenameBanias (2003)Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025)
Release dateno data (2024 years ago)January 2025

Detailed specifications

Celeron M 310 and Core Ultra 9 285 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 cores1 (Single-Core)24 (Tetracosa-Core)
Threads124
Base clock speed1.2 GHz2.5 GHz
Boost clock speed1.2 GHz5.6 GHz
Bus rate400 MHzno data
L1 cacheno data112 KB (per core)
L2 cacheno data3 MB (per core)
L3 cache512 KB L236 MB (shared)
Chip lithography130 nm3 nm
Die sizeno data243 mm2
Maximum core temperature100 °Cno data
Number of transistorsno data17,800 million
64 bit support-+
Windows 11 compatibility-no data
VID voltage range1.356Vno data

Compatibility

Information on Celeron M 310 and Core Ultra 9 285 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 configurationno data1
SocketH-PBGA479, PPGA4781851
Power consumption (TDP)24.5 Watt125 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M 310 and Core Ultra 9 285. 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
Demand Based Switching-no data
PAE32 Bitno data
FSB parity-no data

Security technologies

Celeron M 310 and Core Ultra 9 285 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 M 310 and Core Ultra 9 285 are enumerated here.

VT-dno data+
VT-x-+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron M 310 and Core Ultra 9 285. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR5 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 M 310 and Core Ultra 9 285.

PCIe versionno data5.0
PCI Express lanesno data20

Pros & cons summary


Physical cores 1 24
Threads 1 24
Chip lithography 130 nm 3 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 24 Watt 125 Watt

Celeron M 310 has 420.8% lower power consumption.

Ultra 9 285, on the other hand, has 2300% more physical cores and 2300% more threads, and a 4233.3% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Celeron M 310 and Core Ultra 9 285. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Celeron M 310 is a notebook processor while Core Ultra 9 285 is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M 310 and Core Ultra 9 285, 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 M 310
Celeron M 310
Intel Core Ultra 9 285
Core Ultra 9 285

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.


4.5 6 votes

Rate Celeron M 310 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.4 74 votes

Rate Core Ultra 9 285 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron M 310 or Core Ultra 9 285, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.