Apple M2 Pro vs Celeron E3500
Aggregate performance score
Apple M2 Pro outperforms Celeron E3500 by a whopping 2222% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Celeron E3500 and Apple M2 Pro processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2801 | 537 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 2.99 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | no data | Apple Apple M-Series |
| Power efficiency | 0.86 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Wolfdale (2008−2010) | no data |
| Release date | 29 August 2010 (14 years ago) | 17 January 2023 (1 year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $62 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Celeron E3500 and Apple M2 Pro 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 | 2.7 GHz | 2.424 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.7 GHz | 3.5 GHz |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 3.3 MB |
| L2 cache | 1 MB (shared) | 36 MB |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 24 MB |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 5 nm |
| Die size | 82 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | 74 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 228 million | 40000 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | no data |
| VID voltage range | 0.85V-1.3625V | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron E3500 and Apple M2 Pro 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 | 2424 ‑ 3504 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron E3500 and Apple M2 Pro. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE2, Intel® SSE3, Intel® SSSE3 | no data |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | no data |
| Idle States | + | no data |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | - |
Security technologies
Celeron E3500 and Apple M2 Pro 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 E3500 and Apple M2 Pro are enumerated here.
| VT-d | - | no data |
| VT-x | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron E3500 and Apple M2 Pro. 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 | no data | Apple M2 Pro 19-Core GPU |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron E3500 and Apple M2 Pro.
| 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 | 0.59 | 13.70 |
| Recency | 29 August 2010 | 17 January 2023 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 12 |
| Threads | 2 | 12 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 2424 Watt |
Celeron E3500 has 3629.2% lower power consumption.
Apple M2 Pro, on the other hand, has a 2222% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 12 years, 500% more physical cores and 500% more threads, and a 800% more advanced lithography process.
The Apple M2 Pro is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron E3500 in performance tests.
Note that Celeron E3500 is a desktop processor while Apple M2 Pro is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron E3500 and Apple M2 Pro, 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.
