Pentium M 780 vs Celeron M 550
Primary details
Comparing Celeron M 550 and Pentium M 780 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | Celeron M | Pentium M |
| Architecture codename | Merom (2006−2008) | Dothan (2004−2005) |
| Release date | no data (2024 years ago) | 25 July 2005 (19 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Celeron M 550 and Pentium M 780 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) | 1 (Single-Core) |
| Threads | 1 | 1 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 2.26 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2 GHz | 0.03 GHz |
| Bus rate | 533 MHz | 533 MHz |
| L1 cache | no data | 32 KB |
| L2 cache | no data | 2 MB |
| L3 cache | no data | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 90 nm |
| Die size | no data | 87 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 100 °C |
| Number of transistors | no data | 144 million |
| 64 bit support | + | - |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| VID voltage range | no data | 1.26V-1.404V |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron M 550 and Pentium M 780 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 | no data | PPGA478, H-PBGA479 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 30 Watt | 27 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M 550 and Pentium M 780. 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 | - |
| PAE | no data | 32 Bit |
| FSB parity | no data | - |
Security technologies
Celeron M 550 and Pentium M 780 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 550 and Pentium M 780 are enumerated here.
| VT-x | no data | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron M 550 and Pentium M 780. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR2 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
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
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 90 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 30 Watt | 27 Watt |
Celeron M 550 has a 38.5% more advanced lithography process.
Pentium M 780, on the other hand, has 11.1% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Celeron M 550 and Pentium M 780. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M 550 and Pentium M 780, 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.
