Pentium 4-M P4-M 1,7 vs Celeron Dual-Core T3500
Primary details
Comparing Celeron Dual-Core T3500 and Pentium 4-M P4-M 1,7 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2592 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | Intel Celeron Dual-Core | Pentium 4-M |
| Power efficiency | 2.16 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Penryn (2008−2011) | Northwood (2002−2004) |
| Release date | 26 September 2010 (14 years ago) | no data (2024 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $80 | no data |
Detailed specifications
Celeron Dual-Core T3500 and Pentium 4-M P4-M 1,7 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 | 2.1 GHz | 1.7 GHz |
| Bus rate | 800 MHz | 400 MHz |
| L1 cache | 128 KB | no data |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | no data |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 130 nm |
| Die size | 107 mm2 | no data |
| Number of transistors | 410 Million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | - |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron Dual-Core T3500 and Pentium 4-M P4-M 1,7 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 | Socket P PGA478 | no data |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 30 Watt |
Security technologies
Celeron Dual-Core T3500 and Pentium 4-M P4-M 1,7 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| EDB | + | 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.
3DMark06 CPU
3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.
wPrime 32
wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.
Pros & cons summary
| Physical cores | 2 | 1 |
| Threads | 2 | 1 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 130 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 30 Watt |
Celeron Dual-Core T3500 has 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and a 188.9% more advanced lithography process.
Pentium 4-M P4-M 1,7, on the other hand, has 16.7% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Celeron Dual-Core T3500 and Pentium 4-M P4-M 1,7. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron Dual-Core T3500 and Pentium 4-M P4-M 1,7, 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.
