Athlon II X2 250 vs Celeron M 575
Aggregate performance score
Athlon II X2 250 outperforms Celeron M 575 by a whopping 170% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 3397 | 2973 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 3.61 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | Intel Celeron M | no data |
| Power efficiency | 0.31 | 0.40 |
| Designer | Intel | AMD |
| Architecture codename | Merom (2006−2008) | Regor (2009−2013) |
| Release date | 1 June 2008 (17 years ago) | 2 June 2009 (16 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $86 | $39 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
Celeron M 575 and Athlon II X2 250 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) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 1 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 3 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2 GHz | 3 GHz |
| Bus rate | 667 MHz | no data |
| L1 cache | no data | 256 KB |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 2 MB |
| L3 cache | no data | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 45 nm |
| Die size | 143 mm2 | 117 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 291 Million | 410 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron M 575 and Athlon II X2 250 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 | PPGA478 | AM3 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 31 Watt | 65 Watt |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron M 575 and Athlon II X2 250. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR3 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron M 575 and Athlon II X2 250.
| PCIe version | no data | 2.0 |
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.23 | 0.62 |
| Recency | 1 June 2008 | 2 June 2009 |
| Physical cores | 1 | 2 |
| Threads | 1 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 45 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 31 Watt | 65 Watt |
Celeron M 575 has 109.7% lower power consumption.
Athlon II X2 250, on the other hand, has a 169.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and a 44.4% more advanced lithography process.
The AMD Athlon II X2 250 is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Celeron M 575 in performance tests.
Be aware that Celeron M 575 is a notebook processor while Athlon II X2 250 is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
