Turion 64 ML-37 vs Celeron M U3400
Primary details
Comparing Celeron M U3400 and Turion 64 ML-37 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 | Intel Celeron M | Turion 64 |
| Architecture codename | Arrandale (2010−2011) | Lancaster (2005−2006) |
| Release date | 24 May 2010 (14 years ago) | March 2005 (19 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Celeron M U3400 and Turion 64 ML-37 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) | 1 (Single-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 1 |
| Boost clock speed | 1.06 GHz | 2 GHz |
| Bus rate | 2500 MHz | 800 MHz |
| L1 cache | no data | 128 KB |
| L2 cache | 512 KB | 1 MB |
| L3 cache | 2 MB | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 90 nm |
| Die size | 81+114 mm2 | 125 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 105 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 382+177 Million | 114 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron M U3400 and Turion 64 ML-37 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 | BGA1288 | 754 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 18 Watt | 35 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M U3400 and Turion 64 ML-37. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| PowerNow | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| Idle States | + | no data |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | - |
| Flex Memory Access | + | no data |
| Fast Memory Access | + | no data |
Security technologies
Celeron M U3400 and Turion 64 ML-37 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 U3400 and Turion 64 ML-37 are enumerated here.
| VT-x | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron M U3400 and Turion 64 ML-37. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | 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.
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
| Physical cores | 2 | 1 |
| Threads | 2 | 1 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 90 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 18 Watt | 35 Watt |
Celeron M U3400 has 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, a 181.3% more advanced lithography process, and 94.4% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Celeron M U3400 and Turion 64 ML-37. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M U3400 and Turion 64 ML-37, 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.
