Celeron 220 vs M 390
Aggregate performance score
Celeron M 390 outperforms Celeron 220 by a substantial 38% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Celeron M 390 and Celeron 220 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 3261 | 3345 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | Celeron M | no data |
| Power efficiency | 0.82 | 0.65 |
| Architecture codename | Dothan (2004−2005) | Conroe (2006−2007) |
| Release date | no data | October 2007 (17 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Celeron M 390 and Celeron 220 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 | 1.7 GHz | 1.2 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.7 GHz | 1.2 GHz |
| Bus rate | 400 MHz | 533 MHz |
| L1 cache | no data | 64 KB |
| L2 cache | no data | 512 KB |
| L3 cache | 1 MB L2 KB | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 90 nm | 65 nm |
| Die size | no data | 77 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | 100 °C |
| Number of transistors | no data | 105 million |
| 64 bit support | - | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| VID voltage range | 1.004V-1.292V | 1V-1.3375V |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron M 390 and Celeron 220 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 | PPGA478, H-PBGA479 | PBGA479 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 21 Watt | 19 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M 390 and Celeron 220. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | - | - |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | - |
| Idle States | - | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | - | + |
| Demand Based Switching | - | - |
| PAE | 32 Bit | no data |
| FSB parity | - | - |
Security technologies
Celeron M 390 and Celeron 220 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | - | - |
| EDB | + | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron M 390 and Celeron 220 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | no data | - |
| VT-x | - | - |
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.18 | 0.13 |
| Chip lithography | 90 nm | 65 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 21 Watt | 19 Watt |
Celeron M 390 has a 38.5% higher aggregate performance score.
Celeron 220, on the other hand, has a 38.5% more advanced lithography process, and 10.5% lower power consumption.
The Celeron M 390 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron 220 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M 390 and Celeron 220, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
