Celeron Dual-Core T3000 vs Turion II Ultra M600

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Turion II Ultra M600
2009
2 cores / 2 threads, 2 Watt
0.52
+44.4%
Celeron Dual-Core T3000
2009
2 cores / 2 threads, 1 Watt
0.36

Turion II Ultra M600 outperforms Celeron Dual-Core T3000 by a considerable 44% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking31093287
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD Turion II UltraIntel Celeron Dual-Core
DesignerAMDIntel
Architecture codenameCaspian (2009)Penryn-1M (2009)
Release date10 September 2009 (16 years ago)1 May 2009 (16 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Turion II Ultra M600 and Celeron Dual-Core T3000 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)2 (Dual-core)
Threads22
Boost clock speed2.4 GHz1.8 GHz
Bus rate3600 MHz800 MHz
L1 cacheno data64 KB
L2 cache2 MB1 MB
Chip lithography45 nm45 nm
Die sizeno data107 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data105 °C
Number of transistorsno data410 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Turion II Ultra M600 and Celeron Dual-Core T3000 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.

SocketSocket S1 (s1g3) 638-pinP (478)
Power consumption (TDP)2 MB1 MB

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Turion II Ultra M600 and Celeron Dual-Core T3000. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsMMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, Enhanced 3DNow!, NX bit, AMD64, PowerNow!, AMD Virtualizationno data
PowerNow+-

Synthetic benchmarks

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.

Turion II Ultra M600 0.52
+44.4%
Celeron Dual-Core T3000 0.36

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. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.

Turion II Ultra M600 923
+43.5%
Celeron Dual-Core T3000 643
Samples: 184

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 II Ultra M600 2120
+18%
Celeron Dual-Core T3000 1797

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

Turion II Ultra M600 4100
+23.2%
Celeron Dual-Core T3000 3329

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 II Ultra M600 1905
+19.6%
Celeron Dual-Core T3000 1593

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.52 0.36
Recency 10 September 2009 1 May 2009
Power consumption (TDP) 2 Watt 1 Watt

Turion II Ultra M600 has a 44.4% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 4 months.

Celeron Dual-Core T3000, on the other hand, has 100% lower power consumption.

The AMD Turion II Ultra M600 is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Celeron Dual-Core T3000 in performance tests.

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 II Ultra M600
Turion II Ultra M600
Intel Celeron Dual-Core T3000
Celeron Dual-Core T3000

Other comparisons

We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


4.6 16 votes

Rate Turion II Ultra M600 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 68 votes

Rate Celeron Dual-Core T3000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about processors Turion II Ultra M600 and Celeron Dual-Core T3000, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report bugs or inaccuracies on the site.