Ryzen 5 PRO 8540U vs Pentium M 1.50
Primary details
Comparing Pentium M 1.50 and Ryzen 5 PRO 8540U processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | 688 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Server |
| Power efficiency | no data | 38.00 |
| Architecture codename | Banias (2003) | Hawk Point (2024) |
| Release date | March 2003 (21 year ago) | 16 April 2024 (less than a year ago) |
Detailed specifications
Pentium M 1.50 and Ryzen 5 PRO 8540U 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 | 1 (Single-Core) | 6 (Hexa-Core) |
| Threads | 1 | 12 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 3.2 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.5 GHz | 4.9 GHz |
| L1 cache | 16 KB | 64 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 1 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 16 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 130 nm | 4 nm |
| Die size | 100 mm2 | 137 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 77 million | 20,900 million |
| 64 bit support | - | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Pentium M 1.50 and Ryzen 5 PRO 8540U 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 | 1 | 1 |
| Socket | 478 | FP7 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 24 Watt | 28 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Pentium M 1.50 and Ryzen 5 PRO 8540U. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| Precision Boost 2 | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Pentium M 1.50 and Ryzen 5 PRO 8540U are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Pentium M 1.50 and Ryzen 5 PRO 8540U. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR1, DDR2 | DDR5 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | AMD Radeon 740M |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Pentium M 1.50 and Ryzen 5 PRO 8540U.
| PCIe version | no data | 4.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 14 |
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
| Physical cores | 1 | 6 |
| Threads | 1 | 12 |
| Chip lithography | 130 nm | 4 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 24 Watt | 28 Watt |
Pentium M 1.50 has 16.7% lower power consumption.
Ryzen 5 PRO 8540U, on the other hand, has 500% more physical cores and 1100% more threads, and a 3150% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Pentium M 1.50 and Ryzen 5 PRO 8540U. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that Pentium M 1.50 is a notebook processor while Ryzen 5 PRO 8540U is a server/workstation one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Pentium M 1.50 and Ryzen 5 PRO 8540U, 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.
