Notebookcheck Logo

Intel Celeron M 520 vs Intel Celeron M 585 vs Intel Celeron M 560

Intel Celeron M 520

► remove from comparison

Basierend auf den Merom kern mit 64 KB L1 Cache (32 KB Daten + 32 KB Instruktionen) und 1024 KB L2 Cache, der mit vollem Prozessortakt läuft.

Verbaut auf Sockel 479, AGTL+ mit 133 MHz (quadpumped 533 MHz)

Intel Celeron M 585

► remove from comparison

Der Intel Celeron M 585 ist ein Einkernprozessor für billige Notebooks. Er basiert auf den Merom Kern, jedoch mit nur einem aktivierten Rechenkern (sozusagen ein T3400 mit nur einem Kern). Er wurde jedoch funktionsmäßig stark abgespeckt und bietet z.B. auch weniger Stromsparfunktionen (kein Speedstep).

Intel Celeron M 560

► remove from comparison

Der Intel Celeron M 560 ist ein Einkernprozessor für billige Einsteiger-Notebooks. Er basiert auf den Merom Kern, jedoch mit nur einem aktivierten Rechenkern. Er wurde jedoch funktionsmäßig stark abgespeckt und bietet z.B. auch weniger Stromsparfunktionen (kein Speedstep). Die Performance ist nur für anspruchslose Aufgaben ausreichend.

ModelIntel Celeron M 520Intel Celeron M 585Intel Celeron M 560
SeriesIntel Celeron MIntel Celeron MIntel Celeron M
CodenameMeromMeromMerom
Serie: Celeron M Merom
Intel Celeron M 5702.26 GHz1 / 1
Intel Celeron M 5852.16 GHz1 / 1
Intel Celeron M 5602.13 GHz1 / 1
Intel Celeron M 5752 GHz1 / 1
Intel Celeron M 5502 GHz1 / 1
Intel Celeron M 5401.86 GHz1 / 1
Intel Celeron M 5301.73 GHz1 / 1
» Intel Celeron M 5201.6 GHz1 / 1
Intel Celeron M 5702.26 GHz1 / 1
» Intel Celeron M 5852.16 GHz1 / 1
Intel Celeron M 5602.13 GHz1 / 1
Intel Celeron M 5752 GHz1 / 1
Intel Celeron M 5502 GHz1 / 1
Intel Celeron M 5401.86 GHz1 / 1
Intel Celeron M 5301.73 GHz1 / 1
Intel Celeron M 5201.6 GHz1 / 1
Intel Celeron M 5702.26 GHz1 / 1
Intel Celeron M 5852.16 GHz1 / 1
» Intel Celeron M 5602.13 GHz1 / 1
Intel Celeron M 5752 GHz1 / 1
Intel Celeron M 5502 GHz1 / 1
Intel Celeron M 5401.86 GHz1 / 1
Intel Celeron M 5301.73 GHz1 / 1
Intel Celeron M 5201.6 GHz1 / 1
Clock1600 MHz2160 MHz2130 MHz
FSB533667533
L2 Cache1 MB1 MB1 MB
Cores / Threads1 / 11 / 11 / 1
TDP30 Watt31 Watt30 Watt
65 nm65 nm, 0.95-1.30V65 nm, 0.95V-1.30V
FeaturesMMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, Intel 64, XD-BitEM64T, Execute Disable BitMMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, Intel 64, XD-Bit
Architecturex86x86x86
Announced
ManufacturerIntel Celeron M 520Intel Celeron M 585Intel Celeron M 560
Transistors291 Million291 Million
Die Size143 mm2143 mm2
max. Temp.100 °C100 °C
SocketPPGA478PPGA478
$70 U.S.
L1 Cache64 KB

Benchmarks

Cinebench R10 - Cinebench R10 Rend. Single (32bit)
100%
1 585 +
2062 Points (17%)
97%
1 560 +
2008 Points (16%)
Cinebench R10 - Cinebench R10 Rend. Multi (32bit)
100%
1 585 +
2062 Points (2%)
97%
1 560 +
2008 Points (2%)
wPrime 1.55 - wPrime 1.55 1024m *
100%
1 520 +
3639 s (14%)
wPrime 1.55 - wPrime 1.55 32m *
100%
1 520 +
112 s (59%)
Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 1M - Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 1M *
100%
520 +
min: 39     avg: 39.2     median: 39.2 (8%)     max: 39.3 s
102%
585 +
31.4 s (7%)
102%
560 +
29.6 s (6%)
Super Pi Mod 1.5 XS 32M - Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 32M *
100%
1 520 +
2015 s (9%)
SiSoft Sandra Dhrystone (MIPS) - SiSoft Sandra Dhrystone (MIPS)
100%
1 520 +
7400 MIPS (4%)
SiSoft Sandra Whetstone (MFLOPS) - SiSoft Sandra Whetstone (MFLOPS)
100%
1 520 +
5078 MFLOPS (4%)
PCMark 05 - PCMark 05 - Standard
100%
1 520 +
min: 1845     avg: 1942     median: 1942 (12%)     max: 2039 Points

Average Benchmarks Intel Celeron M 520 → 100% n=1

Average Benchmarks Intel Celeron M 585 → 102% n=1

Average Benchmarks Intel Celeron M 560 → 102% n=1

- Bereich der Benchmarkergebnisse für diese Grafikkarte
- Durchschnittliche Benchmarkergebnisse für diese Grafikkarte
* Smaller numbers mean a higher performance
1 This benchmark is not used for the average calculation

v1.19
log 30. 10:54:25

#0 checking url part for id 321 +0s ... 0s

#1 checking url part for id 429 +0s ... 0s

#2 checking url part for id 395 +0s ... 0s

#3 not redirecting to Ajax server +0s ... 0s

#4 did not recreate cache, as it is less than 5 days old! Created at Tue, 29 Nov 2022 12:15:11 +0100 +0s ... 0s

#5 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0.002s ... 0.002s

#6 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0.001s ... 0.003s

#7 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.003s

#8 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0.001s ... 0.004s

#9 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.004s

#10 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.004s

#11 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.004s

#12 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.005s

#13 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.005s

#14 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.005s

#15 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.005s

#16 composed specs +0s ... 0.005s

#17 did output specs +0s ... 0.005s

#18 getting avg benchmarks for device 321 +0s ... 0.005s

#19 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.005s

#20 got single benchmarks 321 +0.01s ... 0.015s

#21 getting avg benchmarks for device 429 +0s ... 0.016s

#22 got single benchmarks 429 +0.006s ... 0.021s

#23 getting avg benchmarks for device 395 +0s ... 0.022s

#24 got single benchmarks 395 +0.006s ... 0.028s

#25 got avg benchmarks for devices +0s ... 0.028s

#26 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.028s

#27 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.028s

#28 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.029s

#29 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.029s

#30 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.029s

#31 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.03s

#32 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.03s

#33 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.03s

#34 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.03s

#35 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.031s

#36 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.031s

#37 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.031s

#38 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.032s

#39 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0.001s ... 0.033s

#40 min, max, avg, median took s +0s ... 0.033s

#41 return log +0s ... 0.033s

Teilen Sie diesen Artikel um uns zu unterstützen. Jeder Link hilft!
.170
> Notebook Test, Laptop Test und News > Benchmarks / Technik > Benchmarks / Technik > Prozessor Vergleich - Head 2 Head
Autor: Sebastian Jentsch,  8.09.2017 (Update: 19.05.2020)