Celeron M 370 vs Athlon 64 TF-20
Aggregate performance score
Athlon 64 TF-20 outperforms Celeron M 370 by a small 7% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Athlon 64 TF-20 and Celeron M 370 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 3315 | 3332 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | AMD Athlon 64 | Celeron M |
| Power efficiency | 0.61 | 0.68 |
| Architecture codename | Sherman (2009) | Dothan (2004−2005) |
| Release date | 1 May 2009 (15 years ago) | no data |
Detailed specifications
Athlon 64 TF-20 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 | 1.6 GHz | 1.5 GHz |
| Bus rate | 667 MHz | 400 MHz |
| L1 cache | 0.1 MB | no data |
| L2 cache | 512 KB | no data |
| L3 cache | no data | 1 MB L2 Cache |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 90 nm |
| Maximum core temperature | 95 °C | 100 °C |
| 64 bit support | + | - |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| VID voltage range | no data | 1.004V-1.292V |
Compatibility
Information on Athlon 64 TF-20 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 | S1g1 | H-PBGA478,H-PBGA479,PPGA478 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 25 Watt | 21 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon 64 TF-20 and Celeron M 370. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | MMX, 3DNow!, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, AMD64, Enhanced Virus Protection | no data |
| VirusProtect | + | - |
| 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
Athlon 64 TF-20 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 Athlon 64 TF-20 and Celeron M 370 are enumerated here.
| VT-x | no data | - |
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.16 | 0.15 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 90 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 25 Watt | 21 Watt |
Athlon 64 TF-20 has a 6.7% higher aggregate performance score, and a 38.5% more advanced lithography process.
Celeron M 370, on the other hand, has 19% lower power consumption.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Athlon 64 TF-20 and Celeron M 370.
Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon 64 TF-20 and Celeron M 370, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
