Opteron 242 vs Celeron M 360

Primary details

Comparing Celeron M 360 and Opteron 242 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking3319not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopServer
SeriesCeleron Mno data
Power efficiency0.63no data
Architecture codenameDothan (2004−2005)SledgeHammer (2003−2005)
Release dateno data (2024 years ago)April 2003 (21 year ago)

Detailed specifications

Celeron M 360 and Opteron 242 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)1 (Single-Core)
Threads11
Base clock speed1.4 GHzno data
Boost clock speed1.4 GHz1.6 GHz
Bus rate400 MHzno data
L1 cacheno data128 KB
L2 cacheno data1 MB
L3 cache1 MB L2 KB0 KB
Chip lithography90 nm130 nm
Die sizeno data193 mm2
Maximum core temperature100 °Cno data
Number of transistorsno data106 million
64 bit support-+
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage range1.26V, 1.004V-1.292Vno data

Compatibility

Information on Celeron M 360 and Opteron 242 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 data2
SocketPPGA478, H-PBGA479940
Power consumption (TDP)21 Watt85 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M 360 and Opteron 242. 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
Demand Based Switching-no data
PAE32 Bitno data
FSB parity-no data

Security technologies

Celeron M 360 and Opteron 242 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 Opteron 242 are enumerated here.

VT-x-no data

Pros & cons summary


Chip lithography 90 nm 130 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 21 Watt 85 Watt

Celeron M 360 has a 44.4% more advanced lithography process, and 304.8% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Celeron M 360 and Opteron 242. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Celeron M 360 is a notebook processor while Opteron 242 is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M 360 and Opteron 242, 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 Opteron 242
Opteron 242

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

No user ratings yet.

Rate Opteron 242 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 Opteron 242, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.