Ultra 7 268V vs Pentium M 738
Aggregate performance score
Core Ultra 7 268V outperforms Pentium M 738 by a whopping 6638% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Pentium M 738 and Core Ultra 7 268V processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 3340 | 873 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | Pentium M | no data |
| Power efficiency | 1.23 | 48.77 |
| Architecture codename | Dothan (2004−2005) | Lunar Lake (2024) |
| Release date | no data | 24 September 2024 (less than a year ago) |
Detailed specifications
Pentium M 738 and Core Ultra 7 268V 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) | 8 (Octa-Core) |
| Threads | 1 | 8 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 2.2 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.4 GHz | 5 GHz |
| Bus rate | 400 MHz | 37 MHz |
| L1 cache | no data | 192 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | no data | 2.5 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | no data | 12 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 90 nm | 3 nm |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 100 °C |
| 64 bit support | - | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Pentium M 738 and Core Ultra 7 268V 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 | no data | Intel BGA 2833 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 10 Watt | 17 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Pentium M 738 and Core Ultra 7 268V. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| TSX | - | + |
Security technologies
Pentium M 738 and Core Ultra 7 268V technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Pentium M 738 and Core Ultra 7 268V are enumerated here.
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Pentium M 738 and Core Ultra 7 268V. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR5 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | Arc 140V |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Pentium M 738 and Core Ultra 7 268V.
| PCIe version | no data | 5.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 4 |
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.13 | 8.76 |
| Physical cores | 1 | 8 |
| Threads | 1 | 8 |
| Chip lithography | 90 nm | 3 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 10 Watt | 17 Watt |
Pentium M 738 has 70% lower power consumption.
Ultra 7 268V, on the other hand, has a 6638.5% higher aggregate performance score, 700% more physical cores and 700% more threads, and a 2900% more advanced lithography process.
The Core Ultra 7 268V is our recommended choice as it beats the Pentium M 738 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between Pentium M 738 and Core Ultra 7 268V, 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.
