Apple M1 Max vs Celeron T1600
Primary details
Comparing Celeron T1600 and Apple M1 Max processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | 527 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | no data | Apple M-Series |
| Release date | 1 October 2008 (16 years ago) | 18 October 2021 (3 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Celeron T1600 and Apple M1 Max 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 | no data | 10 (Deca-Core) |
| Threads | no data | 10 |
| Base clock speed | 1.66 GHz | 2.06 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 3.22 GHz |
| L1 cache | no data | 2.9 MB |
| L2 cache | no data | 28 MB |
| L3 cache | 1 MB L2 Cache | 48 MB |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 5 nm |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | no data | 57000 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | no data |
| VID voltage range | 1.075V-1.175V | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron T1600 and Apple M1 Max 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 | no data |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 2060 ‑ 3220 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron T1600 and Apple M1 Max. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | - | no data |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | no data |
| Idle States | - | no data |
| Demand Based Switching | - | no data |
Security technologies
Celeron T1600 and Apple M1 Max technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | - | no data |
| EDB | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron T1600 and Apple M1 Max are enumerated here.
| VT-x | - | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | Apple M1 Max 32-Core GPU |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
Passmark
Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 1 October 2008 | 18 October 2021 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 2060 Watt |
Celeron T1600 has 5785.7% lower power consumption.
Apple M1 Max, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 13 years, and a 1200% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Celeron T1600 and Apple M1 Max. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron T1600 and Apple M1 Max, 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.
