Ultra 7 265K vs Celeron 3765U

VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron 3765U
2015
2 cores / 2 threads, 15 Watt
0.79
Core Ultra 7 265K
2024
20 cores / 20 threads, 125 Watt
37.10
+4596%

Core Ultra 7 265K outperforms Celeron 3765U by a whopping 4596% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron 3765U and Core Ultra 7 265K processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking263287
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data94.19
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesIntel Celeronno data
Power efficiency4.9828.09
Architecture codenameBroadwell (2015−2019)Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025)
Release date1 June 2015 (9 years ago)24 October 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$107$394

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron 3765U and Core Ultra 7 265K 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)20 (Icosa-Core)
Performance-coresno data8
Efficient-coresno data12
Threads220
Base clock speed1.9 GHz3.9 GHz
Boost clock speed1.9 GHz5.5 GHz
Bus rate5 GT/sno data
L1 cache128 KB112 KB (per core)
L2 cache512 KB3 MB (per core)
L3 cache2 MB30 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm3 nm
Die size82 mm2243 mm2
Maximum core temperature105 °Cno data
Number of transistors1300 Million17,800 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data
Unlocked multiplier-+

Compatibility

Information on Celeron 3765U and Core Ultra 7 265K 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
SocketFCBGA1168FCLGA1851
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt125 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 3765U and Core Ultra 7 265K. 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++
Flex Memory Access+no data
SIPP-+
Smart Response-no data
Turbo Boost Max 3.0no data+
FDI+no data
Fast Memory Access+no data
Deep Learning Boost-+
Supported AI Software Frameworks-OpenVINO™, WindowsML, DirectML, ONNX RT, WebNN

Security technologies

Celeron 3765U and Core Ultra 7 265K technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-+
EDB++
Secure Key++
Identity Protection+-
OS Guard-+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron 3765U and Core Ultra 7 265K are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron 3765U and Core Ultra 7 265K. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR5-6400
Maximum memory size16 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 5th Generation Intel ProcessorsIntel® Graphics
Quick Sync Video++
Clear Video+no data
Graphics max frequency850 MHz2 GHz
InTru 3D+no data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron 3765U and Core Ultra 7 265K integrated GPUs.

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

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by Celeron 3765U and Core Ultra 7 265K 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 3765U and Core Ultra 7 265K integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectX11.2/1212
OpenGLno data4.5

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron 3765U and Core Ultra 7 265K.

PCIe version2.05.0 and 4.0
PCI Express lanes1220

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 3765U 0.79
Ultra 7 265K 37.10
+4596%

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 3765U 1252
Ultra 7 265K 58937
+4607%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.79 37.10
Recency 1 June 2015 24 October 2024
Physical cores 2 20
Threads 2 20
Chip lithography 14 nm 3 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 125 Watt

Celeron 3765U has 733.3% lower power consumption.

Ultra 7 265K, on the other hand, has a 4596.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, 900% more physical cores and 900% more threads, and a 366.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Core Ultra 7 265K is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron 3765U in performance tests.

Be aware that Celeron 3765U is a notebook processor while Core Ultra 7 265K is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron 3765U and Core Ultra 7 265K, 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 3765U
Celeron 3765U
Intel Core Ultra 7 265K
Core Ultra 7 265K

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.


No user ratings yet.

Rate Celeron 3765U on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 90 votes

Rate Core Ultra 7 265K on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron 3765U or Core Ultra 7 265K, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.