Turion 64 ML-37 vs Celeron M U3400

VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron M U3400
2010
2 cores / 2 threads, 18 Watt
0.29
+38.1%
Turion 64 ML-37
2005
1 core / 1 thread, 35 Watt
0.21

Celeron M U3400 outperforms Turion 64 ML-37 by a substantial 38% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron M U3400 and Turion 64 ML-37 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking31223227
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel Celeron MTurion 64
Power efficiency1.520.57
Architecture codenameArrandale (2010−2011)Lancaster (2005−2006)
Release date24 May 2010 (14 years ago)March 2005 (19 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Celeron M U3400 and Turion 64 ML-37 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 cores2 (Dual-core)1 (Single-Core)
Threads21
Boost clock speed1.06 GHz2 GHz
Bus rate2500 MHz800 MHz
L1 cacheno data128 KB
L2 cache512 KB1 MB
L3 cache2 MB0 KB
Chip lithography32 nm90 nm
Die size81+114 mm2125 mm2
Maximum core temperature105 °Cno data
Number of transistors382+177 Million114 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Celeron M U3400 and Turion 64 ML-37 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
SocketBGA1288754
Power consumption (TDP)18 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M U3400 and Turion 64 ML-37. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

PowerNow-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Flex Memory Access+no data
Fast Memory Access+no data

Security technologies

Celeron M U3400 and Turion 64 ML-37 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

EDB+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron M U3400 and Turion 64 ML-37 are enumerated here.

VT-x+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron M U3400 and Turion 64 ML-37. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3no 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.

Celeron M U3400 0.29
+38.1%
Turion 64 ML-37 0.21

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 U3400 988
+22.7%
Turion 64 ML-37 805

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.29 0.21
Physical cores 2 1
Threads 2 1
Chip lithography 32 nm 90 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 18 Watt 35 Watt

Celeron M U3400 has a 38.1% higher aggregate performance score, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, a 181.3% more advanced lithography process, and 94.4% lower power consumption.

The Celeron M U3400 is our recommended choice as it beats the Turion 64 ML-37 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M U3400 and Turion 64 ML-37, 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 U3400
Celeron M U3400
AMD Turion 64 ML-37
Turion 64 ML-37

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 4 votes

Rate Celeron M U3400 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate Turion 64 ML-37 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron M U3400 or Turion 64 ML-37, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.