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

Intel Celeron M 723 vs Intel Celeron M 925

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 925

► remove from comparison

The Intel Celeron 925 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 925 is on par with a low clocked dual core at 1.3 - 1.4 GHz. Compared to current AMD single core versions, like the AMD V-Series V160, the Celeron 925 should be faster due to the larger Level 2 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 925
Intel Celeron MIntel Celeron M
PenrynPenryn
Series: Celeron M Penryn
Intel Celeron M 9252.3 GHz1 / 1
Intel Celeron M 900 compare2.2 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 9252.3 GHz1 / 1
Intel Celeron M 900 compare2.2 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 MHz2300 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 925
VT, 64 Bit, EIST, eX Bit
$70 U.S.

Benchmarks

Cinebench R10 - Cinebench R10 Rend. Single (32bit)
100%
1 723 +
1180 (11%)
wPrime 2.10 - wPrime 2.0 32m *
100%
1 723 +
129 s (26%)
3DMark 06 - CPU - 3DMark 06 - CPU
100%
1 723 +
555 Points (3%)
Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 1M - Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 1M *
100%
1 723 +
43.6 s (9%)
PCMark 05 - PCMark 05 - Standard
100%
1 723 +
1776 Points (11%)

Average Benchmarks Intel Celeron M 723 → NAN% n=

- 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. 20:55:40

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

#1 checking url part for id 1604 +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 +0.005s ... 0.005s

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

#6 getting avg benchmarks for device 433 +0s ... 0.005s

#7 got single benchmarks 433 +0.007s ... 0.012s

#8 getting avg benchmarks for device 1604 +0s ... 0.013s

#9 got single benchmarks 1604 +0.005s ... 0.017s

#10 got avg benchmarks for devices +0s ... 0.017s

#11 min, max, avg, median took s +0.002s ... 0.019s

#12 return log +0.003s ... 0.023s

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)