Turion X2 Ultra ZM-80 vs Celeron M U3400

Aggregate performance score

Celeron M U3400
2010
2 cores / 2 threads, 18 Watt
0.29
Turion X2 Ultra ZM-80
2008
2 cores / 2 threads, 32 Watt
0.47
+62.1%

Turion X2 Ultra ZM-80 outperforms Celeron M U3400 by an impressive 62% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron M U3400 and Turion X2 Ultra ZM-80 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking31062908
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel Celeron M2x AMD Turion Ultra
Power efficiency1.521.39
Architecture codenameArrandale (2010−2011)Puma (2008−2009)
Release date24 May 2010 (14 years ago)3 June 2008 (16 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Celeron M U3400 and Turion X2 Ultra ZM-80 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 cores2 (Dual-core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads22
Boost clock speed1.06 GHz2.1 GHz
Bus rate2500 MHz3600 MHz
L1 cacheno data256 KB
L2 cache512 KB2 MB
L3 cache2 MB0 KB
Chip lithography32 nm65 nm
Die size81+114 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature105 °Cno data
Number of transistors382+177 Millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Celeron M U3400 and Turion X2 Ultra ZM-80 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
SocketBGA1288S1g2
Power consumption (TDP)18 Watt32 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M U3400 and Turion X2 Ultra ZM-80. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataMMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, Enhanced 3DNow!, NX bit, AMD64, PowerNow!, AMD Virtualization
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 X2 Ultra ZM-80 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 X2 Ultra ZM-80 are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
VT-x+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron M U3400 and Turion X2 Ultra ZM-80. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR2

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 U3400 0.29
Turion X2 Ultra ZM-80 0.47
+62.1%

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 U3400 988
Turion X2 Ultra ZM-80 1503
+52.1%

wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

Celeron M U3400 62.2
Turion X2 Ultra ZM-80 39.8
+56.3%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.29 0.47
Recency 24 May 2010 3 June 2008
Chip lithography 32 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 18 Watt 32 Watt

Celeron M U3400 has an age advantage of 1 year, a 103.1% more advanced lithography process, and 77.8% lower power consumption.

Turion X2 Ultra ZM-80, on the other hand, has a 62.1% higher aggregate performance score.

The Turion X2 Ultra ZM-80 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron M U3400 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M U3400 and Turion X2 Ultra ZM-80, 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 U3400
Celeron M U3400
AMD Turion X2 Ultra ZM-80
Turion X2 Ultra ZM-80

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.


2.8 4 votes

Rate Celeron M U3400 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 9 votes

Rate Turion X2 Ultra ZM-80 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron M U3400 or Turion X2 Ultra ZM-80, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.