Athlon 300U vs Celeron M 360

VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron M 360
1 core / 1 thread, 21 Watt
0.14
Athlon 300U
2019
2 cores / 4 threads, 15 Watt
2.43
+1636%

Athlon 300U outperforms Celeron M 360 by a whopping 1636% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron M 360 and Athlon 300U processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking33351775
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesCeleron MAMD Athlon
Power efficiency0.6315.33
Architecture codenameDothan (2004−2005)Raven Ridge 2 (2019)
Release dateno data6 January 2019 (5 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Celeron M 360 and Athlon 300U 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 cores1 (Single-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads14
Base clock speed1.4 GHz2.4 GHz
Boost clock speed1.4 GHz3.3 GHz
Bus typeno dataPCIe 3.0
Bus rate400 MHzno data
Multiplierno data24
L1 cacheno data128K (per core)
L2 cacheno data512K (per core)
L3 cache1 MB L2 KB4 MB (shared)
Chip lithography90 nm14 nm
Die sizeno data209.78 mm2
Maximum core temperature100 °Cno data
Number of transistorsno data4940 Million
64 bit support-+
Windows 11 compatibility-+
VID voltage range1.26V, 1.004V-1.292Vno data

Compatibility

Information on Celeron M 360 and Athlon 300U 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 configurationno data1 (Uniprocessor)
SocketPPGA478, H-PBGA479FP5
Power consumption (TDP)21 Watt15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M 360 and Athlon 300U. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataXFR, FMA3, SSE 4.2, AVX2, SMT
AES-NI-+
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)-no data
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
Idle States-no data
Demand Based Switching-no data
PAE32 Bitno data
FSB parity-no data

Security technologies

Celeron M 360 and Athlon 300U 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 M 360 and Athlon 300U are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
VT-x-no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron M 360 and Athlon 300U. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR4 Dual-channel
Maximum memory sizeno data64 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
Maximum memory bandwidthno data38.397 GB/s
ECC memory support-+

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataAMD Radeon RX Vega 3 ( - 1000 MHz)

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron M 360 and Athlon 300U.

PCIe versionno data3.0
PCI Express lanesno data12

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.

Celeron M 360 0.14
Athlon 300U 2.43
+1636%

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.

Celeron M 360 221
Athlon 300U 3863
+1648%

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.

Celeron M 360 131
Athlon 300U 15.44
+748%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.14 2.43
Physical cores 1 2
Threads 1 4
Chip lithography 90 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 21 Watt 15 Watt

Athlon 300U has a 1635.7% higher aggregate performance score, 100% more physical cores and 300% more threads, a 542.9% more advanced lithography process, and 40% lower power consumption.

The Athlon 300U is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron M 360 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M 360 and Athlon 300U, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


Intel Celeron M 360
Celeron M 360
AMD Athlon 300U
Athlon 300U

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.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


2.8 12 votes

Rate Celeron M 360 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 462 votes

Rate Athlon 300U on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron M 360 or Athlon 300U, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.