, , , , , ,
search relation.
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
 

Intel Celeron M 723 vs Intel Celeron M 900

Intel Celeron M 723

► remove from comparison

The Intel Celeron M ULV 723 is an ultra low voltage processor based on the Penryn architecture. It features only one core and is intended for the use in very small laptops and netbooks. Many features of the Penryn core are deactivated, like Virtualization VT-x, Trusted Execution support and most importantly power saving functions like Speedstep. This leads to a higher power consumption without load.

The performance of the Celeron 723 is only comparable to Intel Atom N470 on average. In some benchmarks, however, the Celeron can be significantly faster (e.g. SuperPi). All in all, the performance is only suited for very low demanding tasks.

Intel Celeron M 900

► remove from comparison

The Intel Celeron 900 is a mobile single core processor for cheap laptops. It is based on the Penryn core (as the Core 2 Duo Dual Core processors) but many features and one core are deactivated. The missing power saving features, like Speedstep, lead to a lower battery runtime (compared to Core 2 Duo powered laptops). Furthermore, features like Virtualization and Trusted Execution are deactivated.

The performance of the single core processor is located in the entry level segment. Due to the missing 2nd core, the performance may suffer when using many applications at once. Otherwise (in synthetic benchmarks), the Celeron M 900 is on par with a 1.3 GHz Athlon II Neo K325. The similar clocked AMD V-Series V120 should be slower due to the smaller Cache and different architecture. On contrast it usually features the faster chipset graphics card by ATI leading to a better overall performance.

Intel Celeron M 723Intel Celeron M 900
Intel Celeron MIntel Celeron M
PenrynPenryn
Series: Celeron M Penryn
Intel Celeron M 925 compare2.3 GHz1 / 1
Intel Celeron M 9002.2 GHz1 / 1
Intel Celeron M 763 compare1.4 GHz1 / 1
Intel Celeron M 743 compare1.3 GHz1 / 1
» Intel Celeron M 7231.2 GHz1 / 1
Intel Celeron M 722 compare1.2 GHz1 / 1
Intel Celeron M 925 compare2.3 GHz1 / 1
» Intel Celeron M 9002.2 GHz1 / 1
Intel Celeron M 763 compare1.4 GHz1 / 1
Intel Celeron M 743 compare1.3 GHz1 / 1
Intel Celeron M 7231.2 GHz1 / 1
Intel Celeron M 722 compare1.2 GHz1 / 1
1200 MHz2200 MHz
800800
1 MB1 MB
1 / 11 / 1
5 35
410 410
45 1.05-1.15V45
107 mm2107 mm2
100 °C105 °C
BGA956PGA478
Architecturex86x86
Intel Celeron M 723Intel Celeron M 900
VT, 64 Bit, EIST, eX Bit
$70 U.S.

Benchmarks

Cinebench R10 - Cinebench R10 Rend. Single (32bit)
100%
723 +
1180 (11%)
178%
900 +
min: 2062     avg: 2101     median: 2101 (19%)     max: 2140
wPrime 2.10 - wPrime 2.0 32m *
100%
1 723 +
129 s (26%)
3DMark 06 - CPU - 3DMark 06 - CPU
100%
723 +
555 Points (3%)
180%
900 +
1000 Points (6%)
Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 1M - Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 1M *
100%
723 +
43.6 s (9%)
102%
900 +
min: 27.8     avg: 33.9     median: 33.9 (7%)     max: 40 s
Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 2M - Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 2M *
100%
1 900 +
min: 67     avg: 81.5     median: 81.5 (3%)     max: 96 s
Super Pi Mod 1.5 XS 32M - Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 32M *
100%
1 900 +
2000 s (9%)
SiSoft Sandra Dhrystone (MIPS) - SiSoft Sandra Dhrystone (MIPS)
100%
1 900 +
9400 MIPS (4%)
SiSoft Sandra Whetstone (MFLOPS) - SiSoft Sandra Whetstone (MFLOPS)
100%
1 900 +
7990 MFLOPS (6%)
PCMark 05 - PCMark 05 - Standard
100%
723 +
1776 Points (11%)
146%
900 +
2586 Points (16%)

Average Benchmarks Intel Celeron M 723 → 100% n=4

Average Benchmarks Intel Celeron M 900 → 152% n=4

- Range of benchmark values for this graphics card
- Average benchmark values for this graphics card
* Smaller numbers mean a higher performance
1 This benchmark is not used for the average calculation

Add one or more devices and compare

In the following list you can select (and also search for) devices that should be added to the comparison. You can select more than one device.

restrict list:

show all (including archived), 2021, 2020
v1.16
log 16. 21:06:40

#0 checking url part for id 433 +0s ... 0s

#1 checking url part for id 478 +0s ... 0s

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

#3 did not recreate cache, as it is less than 5 days old! Created at Wed, 15 Sep 2021 13:09:12 +0200 +0s ... 0s

#4 composed specs +0.007s ... 0.007s

#5 did output specs +0s ... 0.007s

#6 getting avg benchmarks for device 433 +0s ... 0.007s

#7 got single benchmarks 433 +0.008s ... 0.016s

#8 getting avg benchmarks for device 478 +0s ... 0.016s

#9 got single benchmarks 478 +0.014s ... 0.03s

#10 got avg benchmarks for devices +0s ... 0.03s

#11 min, max, avg, median took s +0.005s ... 0.035s

#12 return log +0.028s ... 0.062s

Please share our article, every link counts!
> Notebook / Laptop Reviews and News > Benchmarks / Tech > Processor Comparison - Head 2 Head
Redaktion, 2017-09- 8 (Update: 2017-09-11)