Celeron 2.60 vs M 383
Primary details
Comparing Celeron M 383 and Celeron 2.60 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | Celeron M | no data |
| Architecture codename | Dothan (2004−2005) | Northwood (2002−2004) |
| Release date | no data (2024 years ago) | June 2003 (21 year ago) |
Detailed specifications
Celeron M 383 and Celeron 2.60 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 |
| Boost clock speed | 1 GHz | 2.6 GHz |
| Bus rate | 400 MHz | no data |
| L1 cache | no data | 8 KB |
| L2 cache | no data | 128 KB |
| L3 cache | no data | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 90 nm | 130 nm |
| Die size | no data | 146 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | no data | 55 million |
| 64 bit support | - | - |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron M 383 and Celeron 2.60 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 | no data | 478 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 5 Watt | 73 Watt |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron M 383 and Celeron 2.60. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR1, DDR2 |
Pros & cons summary
| Chip lithography | 90 nm | 130 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 5 Watt | 73 Watt |
Celeron M 383 has a 44.4% more advanced lithography process, and 1360% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Celeron M 383 and Celeron 2.60. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that Celeron M 383 is a notebook processor while Celeron 2.60 is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M 383 and Celeron 2.60, 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.
