Ultra 9 288V vs Celeron M 900

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron M 900
2009
1 core / 1 thread, 35 Watt
0.08
Core Ultra 9 288V
2024
8 cores / 8 threads, 30 Watt
12.44
+15450%

Core Ultra 9 288V outperforms Celeron M 900 by a whopping 15450% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron M 900 and Core Ultra 9 288V processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking3398623
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel Celeron Mno data
Power efficiency0.2239.04
Architecture codenamePenryn (2008−2011)Lunar Lake (2024)
Release date1 April 2009 (15 years ago)24 September 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$70no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron M 900 and Core Ultra 9 288V 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 cores1 (Single-Core)8 (Octa-Core)
Threads18
Base clock speedno data3.3 GHz
Boost clock speed2.2 GHz5.1 GHz
Bus rate800 MHz37 MHz
L1 cacheno data192 KB (per core)
L2 cache1 MB2.5 MB (per core)
L3 cacheno data12 MB (shared)
Chip lithography45 nm3 nm
Die size107 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature105 °C100 °C
Number of transistors410 Millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data

Compatibility

Information on Celeron M 900 and Core Ultra 9 288V 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 configurationno data1
SocketPGA478Intel BGA 2833
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt30 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M 900 and Core Ultra 9 288V. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI-+
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
TSX-+

Security technologies

Celeron M 900 and Core Ultra 9 288V technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron M 900 and Core Ultra 9 288V are enumerated here.

VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron M 900 and Core Ultra 9 288V. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR5

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataArc 140V

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron M 900 and Core Ultra 9 288V.

PCIe versionno data5.0
PCI Express lanesno data4

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.

Celeron M 900 0.08
Ultra 9 288V 12.44
+15450%

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.

Celeron M 900 123
Ultra 9 288V 19761
+15966%

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.

Celeron M 900 2101
Ultra 9 288V 10697
+409%

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.

Celeron M 900 1000
Ultra 9 288V 12505
+1151%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.08 12.44
Recency 1 April 2009 24 September 2024
Physical cores 1 8
Threads 1 8
Chip lithography 45 nm 3 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 30 Watt

Ultra 9 288V has a 15450% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 15 years, 700% more physical cores and 700% more threads, a 1400% more advanced lithography process, and 16.7% lower power consumption.

The Core Ultra 9 288V is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron M 900 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M 900 and Core Ultra 9 288V, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


Intel Celeron M 900
Celeron M 900
Intel Core Ultra 9 288V
Core Ultra 9 288V

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.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


2.8 21 vote

Rate Celeron M 900 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 35 votes

Rate Core Ultra 9 288V on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron M 900 or Core Ultra 9 288V, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.