V-Series V105 vs Celeron M U3400
Aggregate performance score
Celeron M U3400 outperforms V-Series V105 by a whopping 107% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Celeron M U3400 and V-Series V105 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 3121 | 3337 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | Intel Celeron M | AMD V-Series |
| Power efficiency | 1.52 | 1.47 |
| Architecture codename | Arrandale (2010−2011) | no data |
| Release date | 24 May 2010 (14 years ago) | 12 May 2010 (14 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Celeron M U3400 and V-Series V105 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 | 1.2 GHz |
| Bus rate | 2500 MHz | 2000 MHz |
| L1 cache | no data | 128 KB |
| L2 cache | 512 KB | 512 KB |
| L3 cache | 2 MB | no data |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 45 nm |
| Die size | 81+114 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | 105 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 382+177 Million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron M U3400 and V-Series V105 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 | BGA1288 | S1 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 18 Watt | 9 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M U3400 and V-Series V105. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | SSE4A, AMD64, Enhanced Virus Protection, Virtualization |
| VirusProtect | - | + |
| 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 V-Series V105 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 V-Series V105 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 V-Series V105. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR3 |
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.
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.29 | 0.14 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 1 |
| Threads | 2 | 1 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 45 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 18 Watt | 9 Watt |
Celeron M U3400 has a 107.1% higher aggregate performance score, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and a 40.6% more advanced lithography process.
V-Series V105, on the other hand, has 100% lower power consumption.
The Celeron M U3400 is our recommended choice as it beats the V-Series V105 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M U3400 and V-Series V105, 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.
