Turion 64 X2 TL-50 vs Celeron M 575
Aggregate performance score
Turion 64 X2 TL-50 outperforms Celeron M 575 by a substantial 32% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Celeron M 575 and Turion 64 X2 TL-50 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 3170 | 3087 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | Intel Celeron M | 2x AMD Turion 64 |
| Power efficiency | 0.77 | 1.01 |
| Architecture codename | Merom (2006−2008) | Taylor (2006) |
| Release date | 1 June 2008 (16 years ago) | 17 May 2006 (18 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $86 | $154 |
Detailed specifications
Celeron M 575 and Turion 64 X2 TL-50 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) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 1 | 2 |
| Boost clock speed | 2 GHz | 1.6 GHz |
| Bus rate | 667 MHz | 800 MHz |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 512 KB |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 90 nm |
| Die size | 143 mm2 | 147 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 291 Million | 154 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron M 575 and Turion 64 X2 TL-50 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) | 31 Watt | 31 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M 575 and Turion 64 X2 TL-50. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | SSE(1,2,3), AMD64 |
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.25 | 0.33 |
| Recency | 1 June 2008 | 17 May 2006 |
| Physical cores | 1 | 2 |
| Threads | 1 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 90 nm |
Celeron M 575 has an age advantage of 2 years, and a 38.5% more advanced lithography process.
Turion 64 X2 TL-50, on the other hand, has a 32% higher aggregate performance score, and 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.
The Turion 64 X2 TL-50 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron M 575 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M 575 and Turion 64 X2 TL-50, 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.
