Ultra 9 285K vs Celeron 2950M

VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron 2950M
2013
2 cores / 2 threads, 37 Watt
0.78
Core Ultra 9 285K
2024
24 cores / 24 threads, 125 Watt
43.07
+5422%

Core Ultra 9 285K outperforms Celeron 2950M by a whopping 5422% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron 2950M and Core Ultra 9 285K processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking264153
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data74.33
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesIntel Celeronno data
Power efficiency2.0032.61
Architecture codenameHaswell (2013−2015)Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025)
Release date1 September 2013 (11 years ago)24 October 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$75$589

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron 2950M and Core Ultra 9 285K 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 cores2 (Dual-core)24 (Tetracosa-Core)
Threads224
Base clock speed2 GHz3.7 GHz
Boost clock speed2 GHz5.6 GHz
Bus rate5 GT/s250 MHz
L1 cache64K (per core)112 KB (per core)
L2 cache256K (per core)3 MB (per core)
L3 cache2 MB (shared)36 MB (shared)
Chip lithography22 nm3 nm
Die size118 mm2243 mm2
Maximum core temperature100 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)105 °Cno data
Number of transistors1,400 million17,800 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data
Unlocked multiplier-+

Compatibility

Information on Celeron 2950M and Core Ultra 9 285K 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 configuration11
SocketFCPGA946FCLGA1851
Power consumption (TDP)37 Watt125 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 2950M and Core Ultra 9 285K. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2
AES-NI-+
AVX-+
vProno data+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Speed Shiftno data+
Turbo Boost Technology-2.0
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
TSX-+
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring++
SIPP-+
Turbo Boost Max 3.0no data+
Deep Learning Boost-+
Supported AI Software Frameworks-OpenVINO™, WindowsML, DirectML, ONNX RT, WebNN

Security technologies

Celeron 2950M and Core Ultra 9 285K technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-+
EDB++
Secure Key++
OS Guardno data+
Anti-Theft-no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron 2950M and Core Ultra 9 285K are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-d-+
VT-x++
EPT++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron 2950M and Core Ultra 9 285K. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR5-6400
Maximum memory size32 GB192 GB
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidth25.6 GB/sno data
ECC memory support-+

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel HD Graphics for 4th Generation Intel ProcessorsIntel® Graphics
Quick Sync Video-+
Graphics max frequency1.1 GHz2 GHz

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron 2950M and Core Ultra 9 285K integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported34
eDP+no data
DisplayPort+-
HDMI+-
VGA+no data

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by Celeron 2950M and Core Ultra 9 285K integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

Max resolution over HDMI 1.4no data4K @ 60Hz (HDMI 2.1 TMDS) 8K @ 60Hz (HDMI2.1 FRL)
Max resolution over eDPno data4K @ 60Hz
Max resolution over DisplayPortno data8K @ 60Hz

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Celeron 2950M and Core Ultra 9 285K integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno data12
OpenGLno data4.5

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron 2950M and Core Ultra 9 285K.

PCIe version2.05.0 and 4.0
PCI Express lanes1620

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.

Celeron 2950M 0.78
Ultra 9 285K 43.07
+5422%

Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

Celeron 2950M 1234
Ultra 9 285K 68422
+5445%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.78 43.07
Recency 1 September 2013 24 October 2024
Physical cores 2 24
Threads 2 24
Chip lithography 22 nm 3 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 37 Watt 125 Watt

Celeron 2950M has 237.8% lower power consumption.

Ultra 9 285K, on the other hand, has a 5421.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, 1100% more physical cores and 1100% more threads, and a 633.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Core Ultra 9 285K is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron 2950M in performance tests.

Be aware that Celeron 2950M is a notebook processor while Core Ultra 9 285K is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron 2950M and Core Ultra 9 285K, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


Intel Celeron 2950M
Celeron 2950M
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K
Core Ultra 9 285K

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.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


2.7 13 votes

Rate Celeron 2950M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 167 votes

Rate Core Ultra 9 285K on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron 2950M or Core Ultra 9 285K, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.