Turion 64 MK-36 vs Celeron Dual-Core T1700
Aggregate performance score
Celeron Dual-Core T1700 outperforms Turion 64 MK-36 by a whopping 219% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Celeron Dual-Core T1700 and Turion 64 MK-36 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2750 | 3217 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | Intel Celeron Dual-Core | Turion 64 |
| Power efficiency | 1.81 | 0.64 |
| Architecture codename | Merom (2006−2008) | Richmond |
| Release date | 7 December 2008 (16 years ago) | no data |
Detailed specifications
Celeron Dual-Core T1700 and Turion 64 MK-36 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 |
| Boost clock speed | 1.83 GHz | 2 GHz |
| Bus rate | 667 MHz | 800 MHz |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | no data |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 90 nm |
| Die size | 143 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 291 Million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron Dual-Core T1700 and Turion 64 MK-36 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 | no data |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 31 Watt |
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.67 | 0.21 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 1 |
| Threads | 2 | 1 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 90 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 31 Watt |
Celeron Dual-Core T1700 has a 219% higher aggregate performance score, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and a 38.5% more advanced lithography process.
Turion 64 MK-36, on the other hand, has 12.9% lower power consumption.
The Celeron Dual-Core T1700 is our recommended choice as it beats the Turion 64 MK-36 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron Dual-Core T1700 and Turion 64 MK-36, 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.
