Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?

Thanks for adding your opinion. Follow us on Facebook to stay up to date with the latest news!
VS

Intel Core i3 550

CPUBoss Winner
Front view of Intel Core i3 550

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Core i3 550

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core i3 550

Report a correction
Much newer manufacturing process 32 nm vs 90 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Much higher clock speed 3.2 GHz vs 1.5 GHz Around 2.2x higher clock speed
More advanced architecture x86-64 vs x86 A 64-bit architecture allows more RAM to be installed and accessed by the processor
Has a built-in GPU Yes vs No Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes vs No Somewhat common; Allows for maximum performance when needed, while conserving power and minimizing heat production when not needed
Has virtualization support Yes vs No Somewhat common; Boosts performance of virtual machines
Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.54 GHz vs 2.1 GHz Around 2.2x better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Newer Apr, 2010 vs Jan, 2005 Release date over 5 years later
Better PassMark (Single core) score 1,299 vs 916 More than 40% better PassMark (Single core) score
More threads 4 vs 1 3 more threads
Better performance per dollar 1.24 pt/$ vs 1.09 pt/$ Around 15% better performance per dollar
More cores 2 vs 1 Twice as many cores; run more applications at once
Much better overclocked clock speed (Water) 3.2 GHz vs 1.5 GHz Around 2.2x better overclocked clock speed (Water)
Front view of Intel Celeron M 370

Reasons to consider the
Intel Celeron M 370

Report a correction
More l2 cache 1 MB vs 0.5 MB 2x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Much lower typical power consumption 17.06W vs 59.31W 3.5x lower typical power consumption
Much more l2 cache per core 1 MB/core vs 0.25 MB/core 4x more l2 cache per core
Better performance per watt 4.42 pt/W vs 1.98 pt/W Around 2.2x better performance per watt
Much lower annual home energy cost 5.06 $/year vs 17.59 $/year 3.5x lower annual home energy cost
Much lower annual commercial energy cost 18.4 $/year vs 63.95 $/year 3.5x lower annual commercial energy cost

Benchmarks Real world tests of Core i3 550 vs Celeron M 370

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Core i3 550  vs
Celeron M 370 
Clock speed 3.2 GHz 1.5 GHz
Cores Dual core Single core
Socket type
LGA 1156
478
479

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Supports trusted computing No No
Has virtualization support Yes No
Instruction set extensions
SSE2
MMX
SSE4
SSE3
SSE
SSE4.1
SSE4.2
Supplemental SSE3
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes No

power consumption

TDP 73W 21W
Annual home energy cost 17.59 $/year 5.06 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 63.95 $/year 18.4 $/year
Performance per watt 1.98 pt/W 4.42 pt/W
Typical power consumption 59.31W 17.06W

bus

Architecture DMI FSB
Number of links 1 1

details

Core i3 550  vs
Celeron M 370 
Architecture x86-64 x86
Threads 4 1
L2 cache 0.5 MB 1 MB
L2 cache per core 0.25 MB/core 1 MB/core
Manufacture process 32 nm 90 nm
Transistor count 382,000,000 144,000,000
Max CPUs 1 1
Clock multiplier 24 15
Voltage range 0.65 - 1.4V 1 - 1.29V

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 4.54 GHz 2.1 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 3.2 GHz 1.5 GHz
PassMark (Overclocked) 2,830.2 341.1
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.54 GHz 2.1 GHz

integrated graphics

GPU GPU None
Label Intel® HD Graphics N/A
Number of displays supported 2 N/A
GPU clock speed 733 MHz N/A

memory controller

Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Intel Core i3 550
Report a correction
Intel Celeron M 370
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus