Core M-5Y10c vs Celeron M 575

Core M-5Y10c

2 Cores4 Thrd512 WWMax: 2 GHz2014

Celeron M 575

1 Cores1 Thrd1 WWMax: 2 GHz2008

Performance Spectrum - CPU

Core M-5Y10c

2 / 4

1,906

0.0%

1,917

+0.6%

Pentium 3556U

Pentium Dual Core T4400

About PassMark

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.

Value Upgrade Path

This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (PassMark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The Core M-5Y10c is positioned at rank 1166 and the Celeron M 575 is on rank 827, so the Celeron M 575 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.•
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar Core M-5Y10c

#1152

Atom x5-Z8300

MSRP: $20|Avg: N/A

4327%

#1153

Atom Z3735G

MSRP: $17|Avg: N/A

4264%

#1154

Core i5-480M

MSRP: $81|Avg: $77

3914%

#1155

Core i5-460M

MSRP: $80|Avg: $129

3897%

#1156

Core i5-2540M

MSRP: $266|Avg: $10

3861%

#1158

Core i5-450M

MSRP: $32|Avg: $31

3729%

#1159

Core i3-380M

MSRP: $49|Avg: $25

3575%

#1160

Core i5-430M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $33

3569%

#1161

Core 2 Duo T6600

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $4

3473%

#1164

Core M-5Y10a

MSRP: $281|Avg: $281

100%

#1165

Core M-5Y31

MSRP: $281|Avg: $30

100%

#1166

Core M-5Y10c

MSRP: $281|Avg: $281

100%

#1168

Celeron 1047UE

MSRP: $100|Avg: $100

100%

#1169

Core M-5Y70

MSRP: $281|Avg: $281

99%

#1170

Celeron U3400

MSRP: $86|Avg: $5

99%

#1171

Celeron T1600

MSRP: $107|Avg: $15

99%

#1172

Pro A12-8800B

MSRP: $400|Avg: $40

98%

#1174

Core i7-2637M

MSRP: $289|Avg: N/A

96%

#1175

Athlon PRO 3045B

MSRP: $426|Avg: $180

96%

#1176

Core 2 Duo SL9600

MSRP: $316|Avg: N/A

96%

#1177

Core 2 Duo T5600

MSRP: $241|Avg: N/A

95%

#1178

Pentium N3510

MSRP: $161|Avg: $161

95%

#1179

Core i7-7Y75

MSRP: $393|Avg: $285

95%

Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Per Dollar Celeron M 575

#814

Atom x5-Z8300

MSRP: $20|Avg: N/A

1316%

#815

Atom Z3735G

MSRP: $17|Avg: N/A

1297%

#816

Core i5-480M

MSRP: $81|Avg: $77

1191%

#817

Core i5-460M

MSRP: $80|Avg: $129

1185%

#818

Core i5-2540M

MSRP: $266|Avg: $10

1174%

#820

Core i5-450M

MSRP: $32|Avg: $31

1134%

#821

Core i3-380M

MSRP: $49|Avg: $25

1087%

#822

Core i5-430M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $33

1086%

#823

Core 2 Duo T6600

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $4

1057%

#827

Celeron M 575

MSRP: $86|Avg: $12

100%

#828

Core i7-10710U

MSRP: $415|Avg: N/A

100%

#834

FX-9830P

MSRP: $150|Avg: $45

99%

#835

Celeron M P4600

MSRP: $86|Avg: $15

98%

#836

Celeron 887

MSRP: $86|Avg: $15

98%

Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Comparison

About PassMark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

Generational Difference: This comparison involves processors from different technological eras. The Core M-5Y10c (2014) utilizes 14 nm technology and DDR3, providing a fundamental performance advantage.

Insight	Core M-5Y10c	Celeron M 575
Gaming	Balanced gaming performance	Balanced gaming performance
Workstation	❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks	✅ Better multi-core power
Price	⚠️ Higher cost ($281)	✅ More affordable ($12)
Longevity	🛑 Legacy (Broadwell-Y (2014) / 14 nm)	🛑 Legacy (Merom (2006−2008) / 65 nm)

💎 Value Proposition

The Celeron M 575 (2008) relies on 65 nm technology and older memory, placing it in a different performance category relative to modern standards.

Insight	Core M-5Y10c	Celeron M 575
Cost Efficiency	❌ Lower cost efficiency	✅ Better overall value (+2255%)
Upfront Cost	⚠️ Higher cost ($281)	✅ More affordable ($12)

Performance Check

Paired with RTX 4090

To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.

Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.

Core M-5Y10c Benchmark Check

Celeron M 575 Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core M-5Y10c and Celeron M 575

Core M-5Y10c

The Core M-5Y10c is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 27 October 2014 (11 years ago). It is based on the Broadwell-Y (2014) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 0.8 GHz, with boost up to 2 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1234. Thermal design power (TDP): 4.5 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,906 points. Launch price was $281.

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.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core M-5Y10c packs 2 cores / 4 threads, while the Celeron M 575 offers 1 cores / 1 threads — the Core M-5Y10c has 1 more core. Boost clocks reach 2 GHz on the Core M-5Y10c versus 2 GHz on the Celeron M 575 — identical boost frequencies. The Core M-5Y10c uses the Broadwell-Y (2014) architecture (14 nm), while the Celeron M 575 uses Merom (2006−2008) (65 nm). In PassMark, the Core M-5Y10c scores 1,906 against the Celeron M 575's 1,917 — a 0.6% lead for the Celeron M 575.

Feature	Core M-5Y10c	Celeron M 575
Cores / Threads	2 / 4+100%	1 / 1
Boost Clock	2 GHz	2 GHz
Base Clock	0.8 GHz	—
L3 Cache	4 MB (total)	—
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	1 MB+300%
Process	14 nm-78%	65 nm
Architecture	Broadwell-Y (2014)	Merom (2006−2008)
PassMark	1,906	1,917

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core M-5Y10c uses the FCBGA1234 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Celeron M 575 uses PGA478 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches LPDDR3-1600 on the Core M-5Y10c versus 800 on the Celeron M 575 — the Celeron M 575 supports 198.5% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Core M-5Y10c supports up to 16 GB of RAM compared to 4 — 120% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 12 (Core M-5Y10c) vs 0 (Celeron M 575) — the Core M-5Y10c offers 12 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.

Feature	Core M-5Y10c	Celeron M 575
Socket	FCBGA1234	PGA478
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+173%	PCIe 1.1
Max RAM Speed	LPDDR3-1600	800+26567%
Max RAM Capacity	16 GB+419430300%	4
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	❌	❌
PCIe Lanes	12	0

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core M-5Y10c) vs false (Celeron M 575). The Core M-5Y10c includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics 5300), while the Celeron M 575 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core M-5Y10c targets Mobile. Direct competitor: Celeron M 575 rivals Mobile Sempron SI-40.

Feature	Core M-5Y10c	Celeron M 575
Integrated GPU	Yes	No
IGPU Model	HD Graphics 5300	None
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	false
Target Use	Mobile	—

💰

Value Analysis

The Core M-5Y10c launched at $281 MSRP, while the Celeron M 575 debuted at $86. At current prices ($281 vs $12), the Celeron M 575 is $269 cheaper. In terms of value (PassMark points per dollar), the Core M-5Y10c delivers 6.8 pts/$ vs 159.8 pts/$ for the Celeron M 575 — making the Celeron M 575 the 183.7% better value option.