Apple M2 Max vs Celeron G6900
Aggregate performance score
Apple M2 Max outperforms Celeron G6900 by a whopping 485% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Celeron G6900 and Apple M2 Max processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 1664 | 385 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | no data | Apple M-Series |
| Power efficiency | 5.90 | 20.10 |
| Architecture codename | Alder Lake-S (2022) | no data |
| Release date | 4 January 2022 (2 years ago) | 17 January 2023 (1 year ago) |
Detailed specifications
Celeron G6900 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 | 3.4 GHz | 2.424 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.4 GHz | 3.7 GHz |
| L1 cache | 80K (per core) | 3.3 MB |
| L2 cache | 1.25 MB (per core) | 36 MB |
| L3 cache | 4 MB (shared) | 48 MB |
| Chip lithography | Intel 7 nm | 5 nm |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | no data | 67000 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | + | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron G6900 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 | FCLGA1700 | no data |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 46 Watt | 79 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron G6900 and Apple M2 Max. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2 | no data |
| AES-NI | + | - |
| AVX | + | - |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| Speed Shift | + | no data |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | no data |
| TSX | + | - |
| Idle States | + | no data |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | - |
| Turbo Boost Max 3.0 | - | no data |
| Deep Learning Boost | + | - |
Security technologies
Celeron G6900 and Apple M2 Max technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | + | no data |
| EDB | + | no data |
| Secure Key | + | no data |
| OS Guard | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron G6900 and Apple M2 Max are enumerated here.
| VT-d | + | no data |
| VT-x | + | no data |
| EPT | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron G6900 and Apple M2 Max. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 | no data |
| Maximum memory size | 128 GB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 2 | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 76.8 GB/s | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | Intel UHD Graphics 710 | Apple M2 Max 38-Core GPU |
| Quick Sync Video | + | - |
| Clear Video HD | + | no data |
| Graphics max frequency | 1.3 GHz | no data |
| Execution Units | 16 | no data |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Celeron G6900 and Apple M2 Max integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | 4 | no data |
Graphics image quality
Maximum display resolutions supported by Celeron G6900 and Apple M2 Max integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.
| Max resolution over HDMI 1.4 | 4096 x 2160 @ 60Hz | no data |
| Max resolution over eDP | 5120 x 3200 @ 120Hz | no data |
| Max resolution over DisplayPort | 7680 x 4320 @ 60Hz | no data |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by Celeron G6900 and Apple M2 Max integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | 12 | no data |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron G6900 and Apple M2 Max.
| PCIe version | 5.0 and 4.0 | no data |
| PCI Express lanes | 20 | 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 | 2.87 | 16.78 |
| Recency | 4 January 2022 | 17 January 2023 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 12 |
| Threads | 2 | 12 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 46 Watt | 79 Watt |
Celeron G6900 has 71.7% lower power consumption.
Apple M2 Max, on the other hand, has a 484.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and 500% more physical cores and 500% more threads.
The Apple M2 Max is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron G6900 in performance tests.
Note that Celeron G6900 is a desktop processor while Apple M2 Max is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron G6900 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.
