Celeron M 430 vs Dual-Core T1600
Primary details
Comparing Celeron Dual-Core T1600 and Celeron M 430 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 2681 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | Intel Celeron Dual-Core | Celeron M |
| Architecture codename | Merom (2006−2008) | Yonah (2005−2006) |
| Release date | 1 May 2008 (16 years ago) | no data |
| Current price | $66 | $222 |
Detailed specifications
Celeron Dual-Core T1600 and Celeron M 430 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 | 2 (Dual-core) | 1 (Single-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 1 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 1.73 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.66 GHz | 1.73 GHz |
| Bus support | 667 MHz | 533 MHz |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | no data |
| L3 cache | no data | 1 MB L2 KB |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 65 nm |
| Die size | 143 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 100 °C |
| Number of transistors | 291 Million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | - |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
| VID voltage range | no data | 1.0V-1.3V |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron Dual-Core T1600 and Celeron M 430 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 | PPGA478 | PPGA478 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 27 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron Dual-Core T1600 and Celeron M 430. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| 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 | - |
| Status | no data | Discontinued |
Security technologies
Celeron Dual-Core T1600 and Celeron M 430 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 Celeron Dual-Core T1600 and Celeron M 430 are enumerated here.
| VT-x | no data | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron Dual-Core T1600 and Celeron M 430. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| ECC memory support | no data | - |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 68%
Dual-Core T1600 outperforms M 430 by 462% in Passmark.
Pros & cons summary
| Physical cores | 2 | 1 |
| Threads | 2 | 1 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 27 Watt |
We couldn't decide between Celeron Dual-Core T1600 and Celeron M 430. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron Dual-Core T1600 and Celeron M 430, 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.
