Celeron M 575 vs Core i5-520UM

PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

Celeron M 575 vs Core i5-520UM FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Celeron M 575 vs Core i5-520UM: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

Celeron M 575

2008

Why buy it

✅Draws 1W instead of 18W, a 17W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,917 vs 1,943).
❌Launch MSRP is still $86 MSRP, while Core i5-520UM mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i5-520UM can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Core i5-520UM

2010

Why buy it

✅+1.4% higher PassMark.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel HD Graphics (Ironlake), while Celeron M 575 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌1700% higher power demand at 18W vs 1W.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron M 575 better than Core i5-520UM?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Celeron M 575 is ahead with a 0.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Core i5-520UM pulls ahead with 1.4% better PassMark.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i5-520UM is the stronger fit. You are getting 1.4% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 4 threads.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Celeron M 575 is the better buy right now. Celeron M 575 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $86 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 0.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. The compromise is that Core i5-520UM is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 1.4% better PassMark. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (22.3 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Core i5-520UM makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2010 vs 2008) and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 4 threads instead of 1/1. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Celeron M 575 vs Core i5-520UM Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Celeron M 575

The Celeron M 575 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 June 2008 (17 years ago). It is based on the Merom (2006−2008) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 2 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: PGA478. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Passmark benchmark score: 1,917 points. Launch price was $86.

Core i5-520UM

The Core i5-520UM is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 7 January 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Arrandale (2010−2011) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.07 GHz, with boost up to 1.87 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1288. Thermal design power (TDP): 18 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-800. Passmark benchmark score: 1,943 points. Launch price was $241.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron M 575 packs 1 cores / 1 threads, while the Core i5-520UM offers 2 cores / 4 threads — the Core i5-520UM has 1 more core. Boost clocks reach 2 GHz on the Celeron M 575 versus 1.87 GHz on the Core i5-520UM — a 6.7% clock advantage for the Celeron M 575. The Celeron M 575 uses the Merom (2006−2008) architecture (65 nm), while the Core i5-520UM uses Arrandale (2010−2011) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron M 575 scores 1,917 against the Core i5-520UM's 1,943 — a 1.3% lead for the Core i5-520UM.

Feature	Celeron M 575	Core i5-520UM
Cores / Threads	1 / 1	2 / 4+100%
Boost Clock	2 GHz+7%	1.87 GHz
Base Clock	—	1.07 GHz
L3 Cache	—	3 MB
L2 Cache	1 MB+100%	512 kB
Process	65 nm	32 nm-51%
Architecture	Merom (2006−2008)	Arrandale (2010−2011)
PassMark	1,917	1,943+1%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron M 575 uses the PGA478 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Core i5-520UM uses BGA1288 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to 800 memory speed. The Core i5-520UM supports up to 8 of RAM compared to 4 — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 0 (Celeron M 575) vs 16 (Core i5-520UM) — the Core i5-520UM offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: GL40,GM45 (Celeron M 575) and HM55,HM57,QM57,QS57 (Core i5-520UM).

Feature	Celeron M 575	Core i5-520UM
Socket	PGA478	BGA1288
PCIe Generation	PCIe 1.1	PCIe 2.0+82%
Max RAM Speed	800	800
Max RAM Capacity	4	8+100%
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	0	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: false (Celeron M 575) vs true (Core i5-520UM). The Core i5-520UM includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics (Ironlake)), while the Celeron M 575 requires a dedicated GPU. Direct competitor: Celeron M 575 rivals Mobile Sempron SI-40; Core i5-520UM rivals Core 2 Duo SU9400.