Celeron M 575 vs M 560
Aggregate performance score
Celeron M 560 outperforms Celeron M 575 by a substantial 32% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Celeron M 560 and Celeron M 575 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 3083 | 3170 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | Intel Celeron M | Intel Celeron M |
| Power efficiency | 1.05 | 0.77 |
| Architecture codename | Merom (2006−2008) | Merom (2006−2008) |
| Release date | 1 May 2008 (16 years ago) | 1 June 2008 (16 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $86 |
Detailed specifications
Celeron M 560 and Celeron M 575 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 |
| Boost clock speed | 2.13 GHz | 2 GHz |
| Bus rate | 533 MHz | 667 MHz |
| L1 cache | 64 KB | no data |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 1 MB |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 65 nm |
| Die size | 143 mm2 | 143 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | 100 °C |
| Number of transistors | 291 Million | 291 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron M 560 and Celeron M 575 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 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 30 Watt | 31 Watt |
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.
Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core
Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.33 | 0.25 |
| Recency | 1 May 2008 | 1 June 2008 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 30 Watt | 31 Watt |
Celeron M 560 has a 32% higher aggregate performance score, and 3.3% lower power consumption.
Celeron M 575, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 month.
The Celeron M 560 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron M 575 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M 560 and Celeron M 575, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
