Celeron M U3400 vs Apple M1 Pro
Aggregate performance score
Apple M1 Pro outperforms Celeron M U3400 by a whopping 3634% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Apple M1 Pro and Celeron M U3400 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 712 | 3107 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | Apple M-Series | Intel Celeron M |
| Power efficiency | no data | 1.52 |
| Architecture codename | no data | Arrandale (2010−2011) |
| Release date | 18 October 2021 (3 years ago) | 24 May 2010 (14 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Apple M1 Pro and Celeron M U3400 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 | 10 (Deca-Core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 10 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | 2.064 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 3.22 GHz | 1.06 GHz |
| Bus rate | no data | 2500 MHz |
| L1 cache | 2.9 MB | no data |
| L2 cache | 28 MB | 512 KB |
| L3 cache | 24 MB | 2 MB |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 32 nm |
| Die size | no data | 81+114 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 105 °C |
| Number of transistors | 33700 Million | 382+177 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | no data | - |
Compatibility
Information on Apple M1 Pro and Celeron M U3400 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 | BGA1288 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 2064 ‑ 3220 Watt | 18 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Apple M1 Pro and Celeron M U3400. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Idle States | no data | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | - | + |
| Flex Memory Access | no data | + |
| Fast Memory Access | no data | + |
Security technologies
Apple M1 Pro and Celeron M U3400 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| EDB | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Apple M1 Pro and Celeron M U3400 are enumerated here.
| VT-x | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Apple M1 Pro and Celeron M U3400. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR3 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Apple M1 Pro 16-Core GPU | no data |
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 10.83 | 0.29 |
| Recency | 18 October 2021 | 24 May 2010 |
| Physical cores | 10 | 2 |
| Threads | 10 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 32 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 2064 Watt | 18 Watt |
Apple M1 Pro has a 3634.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, 400% more physical cores and 400% more threads, and a 540% more advanced lithography process.
Celeron M U3400, on the other hand, has 11366.7% lower power consumption.
The Apple M1 Pro is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron M U3400 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between Apple M1 Pro and Celeron M U3400, 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.
