Celeron M 575 vs Turion X2 RM-74
Primary details
Comparing Turion X2 RM-74 and Celeron M 575 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | not rated | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | 2x AMD Turion | Intel Celeron M |
| Architecture codename | Lion (2008−2009) | Merom (2006−2008) |
| Release date | 1 January 2009 (15 years ago) | 1 June 2008 (15 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $86 |
| Current price | $19.80 | $235 (2.7x MSRP) |
Detailed specifications
Turion X2 RM-74 and Celeron M 575 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 |
| Boost clock speed | 2.2 GHz | 2 GHz |
| Bus support | 3600 MHz | 667 MHz |
| L1 cache | 256 KB | no data |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 1 MB |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | no data |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 65 nm |
| Die size | no data | 143 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | no data | 291 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
Compatibility
Information on Turion X2 RM-74 and Celeron M 575 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 | S1 | PPGA478 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 31 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Turion X2 RM-74 and Celeron M 575. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, Enhanced 3DNow!, NX bit, AMD64, PowerNow!, AMD Virtualization | no data |
| PowerNow | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Turion X2 RM-74 and Celeron M 575 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | 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.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 20%
Celeron M 575 outperforms Turion X2 RM-74 by 10% in Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 19%
Turion X2 RM-74 outperforms Celeron M 575 by 76% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 19%
Turion X2 RM-74 outperforms Celeron M 575 by 74% in 3DMark06 CPU.
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 1 January 2009 | 1 June 2008 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 1 |
| Threads | 2 | 1 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 31 Watt |
We couldn't decide between Turion X2 RM-74 and Celeron M 575. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Turion X2 RM-74 and Celeron M 575, 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.
