Phenom II X3 P860 vs Celeron M 520
Primary details
Comparing Celeron M 520 and Phenom II X3 P860 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 | Laptop |
| Series | Celeron M | 3x AMD Phenom II |
| Architecture codename | Merom (2006−2008) | Champlain (2010−2011) |
| Release date | no data (2024 years ago) | 4 October 2010 (14 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Celeron M 520 and Phenom II X3 P860 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) | 3 (Tri-Core) |
| Threads | 1 | 3 |
| Base clock speed | 1.6 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 1.6 GHz | 2 GHz |
| Bus rate | 533 MHz | 3600 MHz |
| L1 cache | no data | 384 KB |
| L2 cache | no data | 1.5 MB |
| L3 cache | 1 MB L2 Cache | no data |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 45 nm |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| VID voltage range | 0.95V-1.3V | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron M 520 and Phenom II X3 P860 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.
| Socket | PPGA478 | S1 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 30 Watt | 25 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M 520 and Phenom II X3 P860. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | Virtualization, AMD64, Advanced Virus Protection, SSE(1,2,3,4a) |
| VirusProtect | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | - | no data |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | no data |
| Idle States | - | no data |
| Demand Based Switching | - | no data |
| FSB parity | - | no data |
Security technologies
Celeron M 520 and Phenom II X3 P860 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | - | no data |
| EDB | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron M 520 and Phenom II X3 P860 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
| VT-x | - | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron M 520 and Phenom II X3 P860. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR3 |
Pros & cons summary
| Physical cores | 1 | 3 |
| Threads | 1 | 3 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 45 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 30 Watt | 25 Watt |
Phenom II X3 P860 has 200% more physical cores and 200% more threads, a 44.4% more advanced lithography process, and 20% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Celeron M 520 and Phenom II X3 P860. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M 520 and Phenom II X3 P860, 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.
