Solo T1400 vs Celeron M 370
Aggregate performance score
Core Solo T1400 outperforms Celeron M 370 by a small 7% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Celeron M 370 and Core Solo T1400 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 3300 | 3284 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | Celeron M | Core Solo |
| Power efficiency | 0.68 | 0.56 |
| Architecture codename | Dothan (2004−2005) | Yonah (2005−2006) |
| Release date | no data (2024 years ago) | January 2006 (18 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Celeron M 370 and Core Solo T1400 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) | 1 (Single-Core) |
| Threads | 1 | 1 |
| Base clock speed | 1.5 GHz | 1.83 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.5 GHz | 1.83 GHz |
| Bus rate | 400 MHz | 667 MHz |
| L1 cache | no data | 64 KB |
| L2 cache | no data | 2 MB |
| L3 cache | 1 MB L2 Cache | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 90 nm | 65 nm |
| Die size | no data | 90 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | 100 °C |
| Number of transistors | no data | 151 million |
| 64 bit support | - | - |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| VID voltage range | 1.004V-1.292V | 1.1625V - 1.3V |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron M 370 and Core Solo T1400 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 | no data | 1 |
| Socket | H-PBGA478,H-PBGA479,PPGA478 | PPGA478, PBGA479 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 21 Watt | 27 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M 370 and Core Solo T1400. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | - | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | - |
| Idle States | - | - |
| Demand Based Switching | - | - |
| PAE | 32 Bit | 32 Bit |
| FSB parity | - | - |
Security technologies
Celeron M 370 and Core Solo T1400 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | - | - |
| EDB | + | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron M 370 and Core Solo T1400 are enumerated here.
| VT-x | - | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron M 370 and Core Solo T1400. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR1 |
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.
wPrime 32
wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.15 | 0.16 |
| Chip lithography | 90 nm | 65 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 21 Watt | 27 Watt |
Celeron M 370 has 28.6% lower power consumption.
Solo T1400, on the other hand, has a 6.7% higher aggregate performance score, and a 38.5% more advanced lithography process.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Celeron M 370 and Core Solo T1400.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M 370 and Core Solo T1400, 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.
