Pentium 4 630 vs Celeron M 560
Aggregate performance score
Celeron M 560 outperforms Pentium 4 630 by a whopping 100% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Celeron M 560 and Pentium 4 630 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 3063 | 3262 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | Intel Celeron M | Pentium 4 |
| Power efficiency | 1.07 | 0.17 |
| Architecture codename | Merom (2006−2008) | Prescott 2M |
| Release date | 1 May 2008 (16 years ago) | no data (2024 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Celeron M 560 and Pentium 4 630 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 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 3 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.13 GHz | 3 GHz |
| Bus rate | 533 MHz | 800 MHz |
| L1 cache | 64 KB | no data |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | no data |
| L3 cache | no data | 2 MB L2 Cache |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 90 nm |
| Die size | 143 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | 67 °C |
| Number of transistors | 291 Million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| VID voltage range | no data | 1.2V-1.4V |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron M 560 and Pentium 4 630 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 | PLGA775 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 30 Watt | 84 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M 560 and Pentium 4 630. 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 | - |
| FSB parity | no data | - |
Security technologies
Celeron M 560 and Pentium 4 630 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 Pentium 4 630 are enumerated here.
| VT-x | no data | - |
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.
Passmark
Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.
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 | 0.34 | 0.17 |
| Threads | 1 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 90 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 30 Watt | 84 Watt |
Celeron M 560 has a 100% higher aggregate performance score, a 38.5% more advanced lithography process, and 180% lower power consumption.
Pentium 4 630, on the other hand, has 100% more threads.
The Celeron M 560 is our recommended choice as it beats the Pentium 4 630 in performance tests.
Be aware that Celeron M 560 is a notebook processor while Pentium 4 630 is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M 560 and Pentium 4 630, 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.
