Ultra 7 265 vs Celeron G1630
Primary details
Comparing Celeron G1630 and Core Ultra 7 265 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2425 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.08 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Desktop processor |
| Power efficiency | 1.84 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) | Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025) |
| Release date | 1 September 2013 (11 years ago) | January 2025 |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $80 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Celeron G1630 and Core Ultra 7 265 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) | 20 (Icosa-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 20 |
| Base clock speed | 2.8 GHz | 2.4 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.8 GHz | 5.3 GHz |
| Bus rate | 5 GT/s | no data |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 112 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 256 KB (per core) | 3 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 2 MB (shared) | 30 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 22 nm | 3 nm |
| Die size | 94 mm2 | 243 mm2 |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 65 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | no data | 17,800 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron G1630 and Core Ultra 7 265 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 | 1 |
| Socket | FCLGA1155 | 1851 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 55 Watt | 65 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron G1630 and Core Ultra 7 265. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2 | no data |
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| vPro | no data | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| My WiFi | - | no data |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | no data |
| TSX | - | + |
| Idle States | + | no data |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | - |
Security technologies
Celeron G1630 and Core Ultra 7 265 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | - | + |
| EDB | + | no data |
| Secure Key | - | no data |
| Anti-Theft | - | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron G1630 and Core Ultra 7 265 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | - | + |
| VT-x | + | + |
| EPT | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron G1630 and Core Ultra 7 265. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR5 |
| Maximum memory size | 32 GB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 2 | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 21 GB/s | no data |
| ECC memory support | + | - |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Intel HD Graphics for 3rd Generation Intel Processors | Arc Xe2 Graphics 64EU |
| Graphics max frequency | 1.05 GHz | no data |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Celeron G1630 and Core Ultra 7 265 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | 3 | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron G1630 and Core Ultra 7 265.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | 5.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 20 |
Pros & cons summary
| Physical cores | 2 | 20 |
| Threads | 2 | 20 |
| Chip lithography | 22 nm | 3 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 55 Watt | 65 Watt |
Celeron G1630 has 18.2% lower power consumption.
Ultra 7 265, on the other hand, has 900% more physical cores and 900% more threads, and a 633.3% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Celeron G1630 and Core Ultra 7 265. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron G1630 and Core Ultra 7 265, 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.
