Celeron 837 vs Athlon II X4 640
Primary details
Comparing Athlon II X4 640 and Celeron 837 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2194 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 2.92 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | no data | Intel Celeron |
| Power efficiency | 1.41 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Propus (2009−2011) | Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) |
| Release date | 11 May 2010 (14 years ago) | no data (2024 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $80 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Athlon II X4 640 and Celeron 837 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 cores | 4 (Quad-Core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | 3 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 3 GHz | 1.8 GHz |
| Bus type | no data | DMI 2.0 |
| Bus rate | no data | 4 × 5 GT/s |
| Multiplier | no data | 18 |
| L1 cache | 128 KB (per core) | 128 KB |
| L2 cache | 512 KB (per core) | 512 KB |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 2 MB |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 32 nm |
| Die size | 169 mm2 | 131 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 300 million | 504 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Athlon II X4 640 and Celeron 837 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 configuration | 1 | 1 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | AM3 | no data |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 17 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon II X4 640 and Celeron 837. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| FMA | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Athlon II X4 640 and Celeron 837 are enumerated here.
| VT-x | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon II X4 640 and Celeron 837. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR3-1333 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 16 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 21.335 GB/s |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | Intel HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Athlon II X4 640 and Celeron 837.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | no data |
Pros & cons summary
| Physical cores | 4 | 2 |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 32 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 17 Watt |
Athlon II X4 640 has 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.
Celeron 837, on the other hand, has a 40.6% more advanced lithography process, and 458.8% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Athlon II X4 640 and Celeron 837. We've got no test results to judge.
Note that Athlon II X4 640 is a desktop processor while Celeron 837 is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon II X4 640 and Celeron 837, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
