Ultra 7 265F vs Celeron M 380

VS

Primary details

Comparing Celeron M 380 and Core Ultra 7 265F processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking3284not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesCeleron Mno data
Power efficiency0.77no data
Architecture codenameDothan (2004−2005)Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025)
Release dateno dataJanuary 2025

Detailed specifications

Celeron M 380 and Core Ultra 7 265F 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)20 (Icosa-Core)
Threads120
Base clock speed1.6 GHz2.4 GHz
Boost clock speed1.6 GHz5.3 GHz
Bus rate400 MHzno data
L1 cacheno data112 KB (per core)
L2 cacheno data3 MB (per core)
L3 cache1 MB L2 KB30 MB (shared)
Chip lithography90 nm3 nm
Die sizeno data243 mm2
Maximum core temperature100 °Cno data
Number of transistorsno data17,800 million
64 bit support-+
Windows 11 compatibility-no data
VID voltage range1.004V-1.292Vno data

Compatibility

Information on Celeron M 380 and Core Ultra 7 265F 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
SocketPPGA478, H-PBGA4791851
Power consumption (TDP)21 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M 380 and Core Ultra 7 265F. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI-+
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)-+
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
TSX-+
Idle States-no data
Demand Based Switching-no data
PAE32 Bitno data
FSB parity-no data

Security technologies

Celeron M 380 and Core Ultra 7 265F technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-+
EDB+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron M 380 and Core Ultra 7 265F are enumerated here.

VT-dno data+
VT-x-+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron M 380 and Core Ultra 7 265F. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR5

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataN/A

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron M 380 and Core Ultra 7 265F.

PCIe versionno data5.0
PCI Express lanesno data20

Pros & cons summary


Physical cores 1 20
Threads 1 20
Chip lithography 90 nm 3 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 21 Watt 65 Watt

Celeron M 380 has 209.5% lower power consumption.

Ultra 7 265F, on the other hand, has 1900% more physical cores and 1900% more threads, and a 2900% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Celeron M 380 and Core Ultra 7 265F. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Celeron M 380 is a notebook processor while Core Ultra 7 265F is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M 380 and Core Ultra 7 265F, 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 380
Celeron M 380
Intel Core Ultra 7 265F
Core Ultra 7 265F

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.


4.6 9 votes

Rate Celeron M 380 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate Core Ultra 7 265F on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron M 380 or Core Ultra 7 265F, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.