Celeron M 380 vs M 560
Aggregate performance score
Celeron M 560 outperforms Celeron M 380 by a whopping 100% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Celeron M 560 and Celeron M 380 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 3063 | 3266 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | Intel Celeron M | Celeron M |
| Power efficiency | 1.07 | 0.77 |
| Architecture codename | Merom (2006−2008) | Dothan (2004−2005) |
| Release date | 1 May 2008 (16 years ago) | no data (2024 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Celeron M 560 and Celeron M 380 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 | 1.6 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.13 GHz | 1.6 GHz |
| Bus rate | 533 MHz | 400 MHz |
| L1 cache | 64 KB | no data |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | no data |
| L3 cache | no data | 1 MB L2 KB |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 90 nm |
| Die size | 143 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | 100 °C |
| Number of transistors | 291 Million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | - |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| VID voltage range | no data | 1.004V-1.292V |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron M 560 and Celeron M 380 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.
| Socket | PPGA478 | PPGA478, H-PBGA479 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 30 Watt | 21 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M 560 and Celeron M 380. 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 560 and Celeron M 380 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 560 and Celeron M 380 are enumerated here.
| VT-x | no data | - |
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.34 | 0.17 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 90 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 30 Watt | 21 Watt |
Celeron M 560 has a 100% higher aggregate performance score, and a 38.5% more advanced lithography process.
Celeron M 380, on the other hand, has 42.9% lower power consumption.
The Celeron M 560 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron M 380 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M 560 and Celeron M 380, 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.
