Celeron M 380 vs Phenom X3 8650
Aggregate performance score
Phenom X3 8650 outperforms Celeron M 380 by a whopping 353% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Phenom X3 8650 and Celeron M 380 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2637 | 3266 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | no data | Celeron M |
| Power efficiency | 0.77 | 0.77 |
| Architecture codename | Toliman (2008) | Dothan (2004−2005) |
| Release date | April 2008 (16 years ago) | no data (2024 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Phenom X3 8650 and Celeron M 380 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 | 3 (Tri-Core) | 1 (Single-Core) |
| Threads | 3 | 1 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 1.6 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.3 GHz | 1.6 GHz |
| Bus rate | no data | 400 MHz |
| L1 cache | 128 KB (per core) | no data |
| L2 cache | 512 KB (per core) | no data |
| L3 cache | 2 MB (shared) | 1 MB L2 KB |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 90 nm |
| Die size | 285 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 100 °C |
| Number of transistors | 450 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | - |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| VID voltage range | no data | 1.004V-1.292V |
Compatibility
Information on Phenom X3 8650 and Celeron M 380 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 | no data |
| Socket | AM2+ | PPGA478, H-PBGA479 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 21 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Phenom X3 8650 and Celeron M 380. 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 | - |
| PAE | no data | 32 Bit |
| FSB parity | no data | - |
Security technologies
Phenom X3 8650 and Celeron M 380 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 Phenom X3 8650 and Celeron M 380 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
| VT-x | no data | - |
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.77 | 0.17 |
| Physical cores | 3 | 1 |
| Threads | 3 | 1 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 90 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 21 Watt |
Phenom X3 8650 has a 352.9% higher aggregate performance score, 200% more physical cores and 200% more threads, and a 38.5% more advanced lithography process.
Celeron M 380, on the other hand, has 352.4% lower power consumption.
The Phenom X3 8650 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron M 380 in performance tests.
Note that Phenom X3 8650 is a desktop processor while Celeron M 380 is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Phenom X3 8650 and Celeron M 380, 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.
