Celeron 1007U vs A6-7480

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

A6-7480
2018
2 cores / 2 threads, 45 Watt
1.19
+120%

A6-7480 outperforms Celeron 1007U by a whopping 120% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A6-7480 and Celeron 1007U processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking23362822
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
Seriesno dataIntel Celeron
Architecture codenameCarrizo (2015−2018)Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)
Release date26 October 2018 (5 years ago)20 January 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$86

Detailed specifications

A6-7480 and Celeron 1007U basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.

Physical cores2 (Dual-core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads22
Base clock speed3.5 GHz1.5 GHz
Boost clock speed3.8 GHz1.5 GHz
Bus typeno dataDMI
Bus rateno data5 GT/s
Multiplierno data15
L1 cache160K64K (per core)
L2 cache1 MB (shared)256K (per core)
L3 cacheno data2 MB (shared)
Chip lithography28 nm22 nm
Die size250 mm2118 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data105 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data105 °C
Number of transistors3,100 million1,400 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibilityno data-

Compatibility

Information on A6-7480 and Celeron 1007U compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.

Number of CPUs in a configuration11
SocketFM2+FCBGA1023
Power consumption (TDP)45 Watt17 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A6-7480 and Celeron 1007U. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2
AES-NI+-
FMA+-
AVX+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
My WiFino data-
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Flex Memory Accessno data+
Demand Based Switchingno data-
FDIno data+
Fast Memory Accessno data+
Statusno dataDiscontinued

Security technologies

A6-7480 and Celeron 1007U technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
EDBno data+
Anti-Theftno data-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A6-7480 and Celeron 1007U are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-dno data-
VT-xno data+
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A6-7480 and Celeron 1007U. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3-2133DDR3
Maximum memory sizeno data32 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
Maximum memory bandwidthno data25.6 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardRadeon R5Intel® HD Graphics for 3rd Generation Intel® Processors
Graphics max frequencyno data1 GHz

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of A6-7480 and Celeron 1007U integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data3
eDPno data+
DisplayPort-+
HDMI-+
SDVOno data+
CRTno data+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A6-7480 and Celeron 1007U.

PCIe version3.02.0
PCI Express lanesno data16

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

A6-7480 1.19
+120%
Celeron 1007U 0.54

Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

A6-7480 1836
+119%
Celeron 1007U 837

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.19 0.54
Recency 26 October 2018 20 January 2013
Chip lithography 28 nm 22 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 45 Watt 17 Watt

A6-7480 has a 120.4% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 5 years.

Celeron 1007U, on the other hand, has a 27.3% more advanced lithography process, and 164.7% lower power consumption.

The A6-7480 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron 1007U in performance tests.

Note that A6-7480 is a desktop processor while Celeron 1007U is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between A6-7480 and Celeron 1007U, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


AMD A6-7480
A6-7480
Intel Celeron 1007U
Celeron 1007U

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


2.9 155 votes

Rate A6-7480 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 122 votes

Rate Celeron 1007U on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A6-7480 or Celeron 1007U, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.