Celeron M 340 vs 430
Aggregate performance score
Celeron 430 outperforms Celeron M 340 by a significant 29% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Celeron 430 and Celeron M 340 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 3278 | 3346 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | no data | Celeron M |
| Power efficiency | 0.49 | 0.64 |
| Architecture codename | Conroe-L (2007−2008) | Banias (2003) |
| Release date | June 2007 (17 years ago) | no data |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $50 | no data |
Detailed specifications
Celeron 430 and Celeron M 340 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 | 1.8 GHz | 1.5 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.8 GHz | 1.5 GHz |
| Bus rate | no data | 400 MHz |
| L1 cache | 64 KB | no data |
| L2 cache | 512 KB | no data |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 512 KB L2 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 130 nm |
| Die size | 77 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | 60 °C | 100 °C |
| Number of transistors | 105 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | - |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| VID voltage range | 1V-1.3375V | 1.356V |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron 430 and Celeron M 340 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 | LGA775 | PPGA478 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 24.5 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 430 and Celeron M 340. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | - | - |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | - |
| Idle States | - | - |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | - |
| Demand Based Switching | - | - |
| PAE | no data | 32 Bit |
| FSB parity | - | - |
Security technologies
Celeron 430 and Celeron M 340 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | - | - |
| EDB | + | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron 430 and Celeron M 340 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | - | no data |
| VT-x | - | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron 430 and Celeron M 340. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR1, DDR2, DDR3 | no data |
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.18 | 0.14 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 130 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 24 Watt |
Celeron 430 has a 28.6% higher aggregate performance score, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.
Celeron M 340, on the other hand, has 45.8% lower power consumption.
The Celeron 430 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron M 340 in performance tests.
Note that Celeron 430 is a desktop processor while Celeron M 340 is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron 430 and Celeron M 340, 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.
