Select any two CPUs for comparison
VS

Gaming Performance Comparison

Recommended System Requirements
Game Celeron M ULV 333 900MHz Celeron M ULV 523 930MHz
Cyberpunk 2077 3815% 3235%
Assassins Creed: Valhalla 5171% 4390%
Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War 3694% 3132%
Watch Dogs Legion 5171% 4390%
FIFA 21 3562% 3019%
Microsoft Flight Simulator 4335% 3678%
Godfall 7461% 6341%
Grand Theft Auto VI 6335% 5381%
World of Warcraft: Shadowlands 5987% 5085%
Genshin Impact 2864% 2425%

In terms of overall gaming performance, the Intel Celeron M ULV 523 930MHz is marginally better than the Intel Celeron M ULV 333 900MHz when it comes to running the latest games. This also means it will be less likely to bottleneck more powerful GPUs, allowing them to achieve more of their gaming performance potential.

Both the Celeron M ULV 333 900MHz and the Celeron M ULV 523 930MHz were released at the same time, so are likely to be quite similar.

Both CPUs exhibit very poor performance, so rather than upgrading from one to the other you should consider looking at more powerful CPUs. Neither of these will be able to run the latest games in any playable way.

The 333 900MHz and the 523 930MHz both have 1 cores, and so are quite likely to struggle with the latest games, or at least bottleneck high-end graphics cards when running them. With a decent accompanying GPU, the 333 900MHz and the 523 930MHz may still be able to run slightly older games fairly effectively.

More important for gaming than the number of cores and threads is the clock rate. Problematically, unless the two CPUs are from the same family, this can only serve as a general guide and nothing like an exact comparison, because the clock cycles per instruction (CPI) will vary so much.

The 333 900MHz and the 523 930MHz are from the same family of CPUs, and thus their clock speeds are directly comparable. With this in mind, it is safe to say that with a 0.03 GHz faster base clock rate, the 523 930MHz manages to provide marginally better performance than the 333 900MHz.

Aside from the clock rate, the next-most important CPU features for PC game performance are L2 and L3 cache size. Faster than RAM, the more cache available, the more data that can be stored for lightning-fast retrieval. L1 Cache is not usually an issue anymore for gaming, with most high-end CPUs eking out about the same L1 performance, and L2 is more important than L3 - but L3 is still important if you want to reach the highest levels of performance. Bear in mind that although it is better to have a larger cache, the larger it is, the higher the latency, so a balance has to be struck.

The 333 900MHz has a 511 KB bigger L2 cache than the 523 930MHz, but neither of the CPUs have L3 caches, so the 333 900MHz wins out in this area with its larger L2 cache.

The System Bus Speed is important for providing higher bandwidth, and with higher bandwidth the system has the capacity to move more data over a certain time period than it would with lower bandwidth.

The 523 930MHz has a 133 MHz faster System Bus Speed than the 333 900MHz, and as such, has a marginally higher limit when it comes to the size of the data being processed at once.

The maximum Thermal Design Power is the power in Watts that the CPU will consume in the worst case scenario. The lithography is the semiconductor manufacturing technology being used to create the CPU - the smaller this is, the more transistors that can be fit into the CPU, and the closer the connections. For both the lithography and the TDP, it is the lower the better, because a lower number means a lower amount of power is necessary to run the CPU, and consequently a lower amount of heat is produced.

The 333 900MHz has a 48 Watt lower Maximum TDP than the 523 930MHz. However, the 523 930MHz was created with a 65 nm smaller manufacturing technology. Overall, by taking both into account, the 523 930MHz is likely the CPU with the lower heat production and power requirements, by quite a wide margin.

CPU Core Details

CPU Codename--
MoBo SocketSocket 956Socket P
Notebook CPUyesyes
Release Date09 Jan 201109 Jan 2011
CPU LinkGD LinkGD Link
Approved

CPU Technical Specifications

CPU Cores1vs1
Clock Speed0.9 GHzvs0.93 GHz
Turbo Frequency-vs-
System Bus 400 MHzvs533 MHz
Max TDP7 Wvs55 W
Lithography130 nmvs65 nm
Bit Width32 Bitvs64 Bit
Voltage Range1.004V KBvs0.85V-1.10V KB
Max Temperature100°Cvs100°C
Virtualization Technologynovsno
Comparison

CPU Cache and Memory

L1 Cache Size-vs-
L2 Cache Size512 KBvs1 KB
L2 Cache Speed-vs-
L3 Cache Size-vs-
ECC Memory Supportnovsno
Comparison

CPU Graphics

Graphics
Base GPU Frequency-vs-
Max GPU Frequency-vs-
DirectX-vs-
Displays Supported-vs-
Comparison

CPU Package and Version Specifications

Package Size35mm x 35mmvs35mm x 35mm
Revision-vs-
PCIe Revision-vs-
PCIe Configurations-vs-

Gaming Performance Value

Performance Value

CPU Mini Review

Mini ReviewPenryn is the code name of a processor from Intel that is sold in varying configurations as Core 2 Solo, Core 2 Duo, Core 2 Quad, Pentium and Celeron. During development, Penryn was the Intel code name for the 2007/2008 "Tick" of Intel's Tick-Tock cycle which shrunk Merom to 45 nanometers as CPUID model 23. The term Penryn is sometimes used to refer to all 45 nm chips with the Core architecture. Chips with Penryn architecture come in two sizes, with 6 MiB and 3 MiB L2 cache. Low power versions of Penryn are known as the Penryn processor. The smaller version is commonly called Penryn-3M and is used for the single-core processors. The Penryn-QC quad-cores are made from two chips with two cores and 6 MB of cache per chip. The desktop version of Penryn is Wolfdale and the dual-socket server version is Wolfdale-DP. Penryn-QC is related to Yorkfield on the desktop and Harpertown in servers. The MP server Dunnington chip is a more distant relative based on a different chip but using the same 45 nm Core microarchitecture.The Celeron brand has been used by Intel for several distinct ranges of x86 CPUs targeted at budget personal computers. Celeron processors can run all IA-32 computer programs, but their performance is somewhat lower when compared to similar CPUs with higher-priced Intel CPU brands. For example, the Celeron brand will often have less cache memory, or have advanced features purposely disabled. These missing features have had a variable impact on performance. In some cases, the effect was significant and in other cases the differences were relatively minor. Many of the Celeron designs have achieved a very high bang for the buck, while at other times, the performance difference has been noticeable. This has been the primary justification for the higher cost of other Intel CPU brands versus the Celeron range