Processor N200 vs Celeron M 530
Aggregate performance score
Processor N200 outperforms Celeron M 530 by a whopping 721% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Celeron M 530 and Processor N200 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 3250 | 2123 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | Celeron M | Intel Alder Lake-N |
| Power efficiency | 0.60 | 24.61 |
| Architecture codename | Merom (2006−2008) | Alder Lake-N (2023) |
| Release date | no data | 3 January 2023 (1 year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $193 |
Detailed specifications
Celeron M 530 and Processor N200 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 | 1 (Single-Core) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 1 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 1.73 GHz | 0.1 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.73 GHz | 3.7 GHz |
| Bus rate | 533 MHz | no data |
| L1 cache | no data | 96 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | no data | 2 MB (shared) |
| L3 cache | 1 MB L2 Cache | 6 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 10 nm |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | 105 °C |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
| VID voltage range | 0.95V-1.3V | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron M 530 and Processor N200 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 | no data | 1 |
| Socket | PBGA479,PPGA478 | Intel BGA 1264 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 30 Watt | 6 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M 530 and Processor N200. 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 |
| Idle States | - | no data |
| Demand Based Switching | - | no data |
| FSB parity | - | no data |
Security technologies
Celeron M 530 and Processor N200 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 530 and Processor N200 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | - | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron M 530 and Processor N200. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR4, DDR5 4800 MHz Single-channel |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | Intel UHD Graphics Xe 750 32EUs (Rocket Lake) (450 - 750 MHz) |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron M 530 and Processor N200.
| PCIe version | no data | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 9 |
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.
Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core
Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.
3DMark06 CPU
3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.19 | 1.56 |
| Physical cores | 1 | 4 |
| Threads | 1 | 4 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 30 Watt | 6 Watt |
Processor N200 has a 721.1% higher aggregate performance score, 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads, a 550% more advanced lithography process, and 400% lower power consumption.
The Processor N200 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron M 530 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M 530 and Processor N200, 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.
