Celeron M 743 vs Turion 64 ML-34
Aggregate performance score
Turion 64 ML-34 outperforms Celeron M 743 by a significant 20% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Turion 64 ML-34 and Celeron M 743 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 3246 | 3298 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | Turion 64 | Intel Celeron M |
| Power efficiency | 0.49 | 1.42 |
| Architecture codename | Lancaster (2005−2006) | Penryn (2008−2011) |
| Release date | 10 March 2005 (19 years ago) | 1 September 2009 (15 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $107 |
Detailed specifications
Turion 64 ML-34 and Celeron M 743 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 |
| Boost clock speed | 1.8 GHz | 1.3 GHz |
| Bus rate | 800 MHz | 800 MHz |
| L1 cache | 128 KB | 64 KB |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 1 MB |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | no data |
| Chip lithography | 90 nm | 45 nm |
| Die size | 125 mm2 | 107 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 100 °C |
| Number of transistors | 114 million | 410 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Turion 64 ML-34 and Celeron M 743 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 | 754 | BGA965 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 10 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Turion 64 ML-34 and Celeron M 743. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| PowerNow | + | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Turion 64 ML-34 and Celeron M 743. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR1 | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) | 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.
3DMark06 CPU
3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.18 | 0.15 |
| Recency | 10 March 2005 | 1 September 2009 |
| Chip lithography | 90 nm | 45 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 10 Watt |
Turion 64 ML-34 has a 20% higher aggregate performance score.
Celeron M 743, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 years, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 250% lower power consumption.
The Turion 64 ML-34 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron M 743 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between Turion 64 ML-34 and Celeron M 743, 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.
