Celeron M 540 vs Turion 64 X2 TL-60

VS

Primary details

Comparing Turion 64 X2 TL-60 and Celeron M 540 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the rankingnot ratednot rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Series2x AMD Turion 64Celeron M
Architecture codenameTrinidad/Tyler (2007)Merom (2006−2008)
Release date4 May 2007 (17 years ago)1 October 2007 (17 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Turion 64 X2 TL-60 and Celeron M 540 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 speed2 GHz1.86 GHz
Bus rate800 MHz533 MHz
L1 cache256 KBno data
L2 cache1 MB1 MB
Chip lithography90 nm65 nm
Die size147 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature95 °Cno data
Number of transistors154 Millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Turion 64 X2 TL-60 and Celeron M 540 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.

SocketS1no data
Power consumption (TDP)35/31 Watt30 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Turion 64 X2 TL-60 and Celeron M 540. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensions90/65 nm, 1.075no 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.



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.

Turion 64 X2 TL-60 1619
Celeron M 540 1744
+7.7%

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.

Turion 64 X2 TL-60 1457
+81.6%
Celeron M 540 803

Pros & cons summary


Recency 4 May 2007 1 October 2007
Physical cores 2 1
Threads 2 1
Chip lithography 90 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 30 Watt

Turion 64 X2 TL-60 has 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.

Celeron M 540, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 months, a 38.5% more advanced lithography process, and 16.7% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Turion 64 X2 TL-60 and Celeron M 540. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions on choice between Turion 64 X2 TL-60 and Celeron M 540, 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.


AMD Turion 64 X2 TL-60
Turion 64 X2 TL-60
Intel Celeron M 540
Celeron M 540

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.


3.7 105 votes

Rate Turion 64 X2 TL-60 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 19 votes

Rate Celeron M 540 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Turion 64 X2 TL-60 or Celeron M 540, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.