Celeron M 350 vs Core 2 Extreme X7900
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 3031 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.01 | no data |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | Intel Core 2 Extreme | Celeron M |
| Power efficiency | 0.61 | no data |
| Designer | Intel | Intel |
| Architecture codename | Merom (2006−2008) | Dothan (2004−2005) |
| Release date | 1 September 2007 (18 years ago) | no data |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $851 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
Core 2 Extreme X7900 and Celeron M 350 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 | 2 (Dual-core) | 1 (Single-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 1 |
| Base clock speed | 2.8 GHz | 1.3 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.8 GHz | 1.3 GHz |
| Bus rate | 800 MHz | 400 MHz |
| L1 cache | 128 KB | no data |
| L2 cache | 4 MB | no data |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 1 MB L2 KB |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 90 nm |
| Die size | 143 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | 100 °C |
| 64 bit support | + | - |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| VID voltage range | 1.1V-1.375V | 1.26V |
Compatibility
Information on Core 2 Extreme X7900 and Celeron M 350 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 | 1 | no data |
| Socket | PPGA478 | PPGA478, H-PBGA479, H-PBGA478, PPGA479 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 44 Watt | 21 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Extreme X7900 and Celeron M 350. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | - |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | - |
| Idle States | - | - |
| Demand Based Switching | - | - |
| PAE | no data | 32 Bit |
| AMT | + | no data |
| FSB parity | - | - |
Security technologies
Core 2 Extreme X7900 and Celeron M 350 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | + | - |
| EDB | + | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core 2 Extreme X7900 and Celeron M 350 are enumerated here.
| VT-x | + | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core 2 Extreme X7900 and Celeron M 350. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR1 | no data |
Pros & cons summary
| Physical cores | 2 | 1 |
| Threads | 2 | 1 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 90 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 44 Watt | 21 Watt |
Core 2 Extreme X7900 has 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and a 38.5% more advanced lithography process.
Celeron M 350, on the other hand, has 109.5% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Intel Core 2 Extreme X7900 and Intel Celeron M 350. We've got no test results to judge.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
