Apple M2 Max vs Celeron E1600
Aggregate performance score
Apple M2 Max outperforms Celeron E1600 by a whopping 3070% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Celeron E1600 and Apple M2 Max processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2862 | 391 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | no data | Apple M-Series |
| Power efficiency | 0.77 | 20.02 |
| Architecture codename | Allendale (2006−2009) | no data |
| Release date | 31 May 2009 (15 years ago) | 17 January 2023 (1 year ago) |
Detailed specifications
Celeron E1600 and Apple M2 Max 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) | 12 (Dodeca-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 12 |
| Base clock speed | 2.4 GHz | 2.424 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.4 GHz | 3.7 GHz |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 3.3 MB |
| L2 cache | 512 KB (shared) | 36 MB |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 48 MB |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 5 nm |
| Die size | 77 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | 73 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 105 million | 67000 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | no data |
| VID voltage range | 0.85V-1.5V | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron E1600 and Apple M2 Max 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 | no data |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 79 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron E1600 and Apple M2 Max. 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 |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | - |
| Demand Based Switching | - | no data |
| FSB parity | - | no data |
Security technologies
Celeron E1600 and Apple M2 Max 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 E1600 and Apple M2 Max are enumerated here.
| VT-d | - | no data |
| VT-x | - | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron E1600 and Apple M2 Max. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR1, DDR2, DDR3 | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) | Apple M2 Max 38-Core GPU |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron E1600 and Apple M2 Max.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | 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.
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 | 0.53 | 16.80 |
| Recency | 31 May 2009 | 17 January 2023 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 12 |
| Threads | 2 | 12 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 79 Watt |
Celeron E1600 has 21.5% lower power consumption.
Apple M2 Max, on the other hand, has a 3069.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 13 years, 500% more physical cores and 500% more threads, and a 1200% more advanced lithography process.
The Apple M2 Max is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron E1600 in performance tests.
Note that Celeron E1600 is a desktop processor while Apple M2 Max is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron E1600 and Apple M2 Max, 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.
