Celeron M 360 vs Core i7-2600
Primary details
Comparing Core i7-2600 and Celeron M 360 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 1478 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | 43 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 1.39 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | no data | Celeron M |
| Architecture codename | Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) | Dothan (2004−2005) |
| Release date | 9 January 2011 (13 years ago) | no data |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $247 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Core i7-2600 and Celeron M 360 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 | 4 (Quad-Core) | 1 (Single-Core) |
| Threads | 8 | 1 |
| Base clock speed | 3.4 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 3.8 GHz | 1.4 GHz |
| Bus support | no data | 400 MHz |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | no data |
| L2 cache | 256 KB (per core) | no data |
| L3 cache | 8192 KB (shared) | no data |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 90 nm |
| Die size | 216 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | 73 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 1,160 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | - |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
Compatibility
Information on Core i7-2600 and Celeron M 360 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 | 1155 | no data |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 21 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i7-2600 and Celeron M 360. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | no data |
| AVX | + | no data |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
Security technologies
Core i7-2600 and Celeron M 360 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i7-2600 and Celeron M 360 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | + | no data |
| VT-x | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i7-2600 and Celeron M 360. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 21 GB/s | no data |
| ECC memory support | - | - |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Intel HD 2000 | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i7-2600 and Celeron M 360.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | no data |
| PCI Express lanes | 16 | 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.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 68%
Core i7-2600 outperforms Celeron M 360 by 2320% in Passmark.
Pros & cons summary
| Physical cores | 4 | 1 |
| Threads | 8 | 1 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 90 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 21 Watt |
i7-2600 has 300% more physical cores and 700% more threads, and a 181.3% more advanced lithography process.
Celeron M 360, on the other hand, has 352.4% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Core i7-2600 and Celeron M 360. We've got no test results to judge.
Note that Core i7-2600 is a desktop processor while Celeron M 360 is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Core i7-2600 and Celeron M 360, 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.
