Celeron M 370 vs Turion 64 MK-38
Aggregate performance score
Turion 64 MK-38 outperforms Celeron M 370 by an impressive 53% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Turion 64 MK-38 and Celeron M 370 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 3192 | 3318 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | Turion 64 | Celeron M |
| Power efficiency | 0.70 | 0.68 |
| Architecture codename | Richmond | Dothan (2004−2005) |
| Release date | no data | no data |
Detailed specifications
Turion 64 MK-38 and Celeron M 370 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) | 1 (Single-Core) |
| Threads | 1 | 1 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 1.5 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.2 GHz | 1.5 GHz |
| Bus rate | 800 MHz | 400 MHz |
| L3 cache | no data | 1 MB L2 Cache |
| Chip lithography | 90 nm | 90 nm |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 100 °C |
| 64 bit support | + | - |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| VID voltage range | no data | 1.004V-1.292V |
Compatibility
Information on Turion 64 MK-38 and Celeron M 370 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 | no data | H-PBGA478,H-PBGA479,PPGA478 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 31 Watt | 21 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Turion 64 MK-38 and Celeron M 370. 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
Turion 64 MK-38 and Celeron M 370 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 Turion 64 MK-38 and Celeron M 370 are enumerated here.
| VT-x | no data | - |
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.
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 | 0.23 | 0.15 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 31 Watt | 21 Watt |
Turion 64 MK-38 has a 53.3% higher aggregate performance score.
Celeron M 370, on the other hand, has 47.6% lower power consumption.
The Turion 64 MK-38 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron M 370 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between Turion 64 MK-38 and Celeron M 370, 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.
