Ultra 7 258V vs Celeron M 550

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron M 550
1 core / 1 thread, 30 Watt
0.29
Core Ultra 7 258V
2024
8 cores / 8 threads, 17 Watt
12.63
+4255%

Core Ultra 7 258V outperforms Celeron M 550 by a whopping 4255% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron M 550 and Core Ultra 7 258V processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking3120612
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesCeleron Mno data
Power efficiency0.9169.94
Architecture codenameMerom (2006−2008)Lunar Lake (2024)
Release dateno data (2024 years ago)24 September 2024 (less than a year ago)

Detailed specifications

Celeron M 550 and Core Ultra 7 258V 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)8 (Octa-Core)
Threads18
Base clock speedno data2.2 GHz
Boost clock speed2 GHz4.8 GHz
Bus rate533 MHz37 MHz
L1 cacheno data192 KB (per core)
L2 cacheno data2.5 MB (per core)
L3 cacheno data12 MB (shared)
Chip lithography65 nm3 nm
Maximum core temperatureno data100 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data

Compatibility

Information on Celeron M 550 and Core Ultra 7 258V 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
Socketno dataIntel BGA 2833
Power consumption (TDP)30 Watt17 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M 550 and Core Ultra 7 258V. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI-+
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
TSX-+

Security technologies

Celeron M 550 and Core Ultra 7 258V technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron M 550 and Core Ultra 7 258V are enumerated here.

VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron M 550 and Core Ultra 7 258V. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR5

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataArc 140V

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron M 550 and Core Ultra 7 258V.

PCIe versionno data5.0
PCI Express lanesno data4

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.

Celeron M 550 0.29
Ultra 7 258V 12.63
+4255%

Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

Celeron M 550 465
Ultra 7 258V 20055
+4213%

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

Celeron M 550 1834
Ultra 7 258V 9982
+444%

3DMark06 CPU

3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.

Celeron M 550 877
Ultra 7 258V 10693
+1119%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.29 12.63
Physical cores 1 8
Threads 1 8
Chip lithography 65 nm 3 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 30 Watt 17 Watt

Ultra 7 258V has a 4255.2% higher aggregate performance score, 700% more physical cores and 700% more threads, a 2066.7% more advanced lithography process, and 76.5% lower power consumption.

The Core Ultra 7 258V is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron M 550 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M 550 and Core Ultra 7 258V, 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 550
Celeron M 550
Intel Core Ultra 7 258V
Core Ultra 7 258V

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.


3.1 28 votes

Rate Celeron M 550 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 14 votes

Rate Core Ultra 7 258V on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron M 550 or Core Ultra 7 258V, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.