Turion 64 X2 TL-50 vs Celeron M P4600
Aggregate performance score
Celeron M P4600 outperforms Turion 64 X2 TL-50 by an impressive 70% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Celeron M P4600 and Turion 64 X2 TL-50 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2839 | 3082 |
| 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 | 1.51 | 1.01 |
| Architecture codename | Arrandale (2010−2011) | Taylor (2006) |
| Release date | 1 October 2010 (14 years ago) | 17 May 2006 (18 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $86 | $154 |
Detailed specifications
Celeron M P4600 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 | 2 (Dual-core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 2 | 2 |
| Boost clock speed | 2 GHz | 1.6 GHz |
| Bus rate | 2500 MHz | 800 MHz |
| L1 cache | 128 KB | no data |
| L2 cache | 512 KB | 512 KB |
| L3 cache | 2 MB | no data |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 90 nm |
| Die size | 81+114 mm2 | 147 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 90 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 382+177 Million | 154 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron M P4600 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 | PGA988 | S1 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 31 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M P4600 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 |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | - |
Security technologies
Celeron M P4600 and Turion 64 X2 TL-50 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| EDB | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron M P4600 and Turion 64 X2 TL-50 are enumerated here.
| VT-x | + | no data |
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 | 0.56 | 0.33 |
| Recency | 1 October 2010 | 17 May 2006 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 90 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 31 Watt |
Celeron M P4600 has a 69.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, and a 181.3% more advanced lithography process.
Turion 64 X2 TL-50, on the other hand, has 12.9% lower power consumption.
The Celeron M P4600 is our recommended choice as it beats the Turion 64 X2 TL-50 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M P4600 and Turion 64 X2 TL-50, 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.
