GX-210JA vs Celeron 1007U

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron 1007U
2013
2 cores / 2 threads, 17 Watt
0.53
+231%
GX-210JA
2013
2 cores / 2 threads, 6 Watt
0.16

Celeron 1007U outperforms GX-210JA by a whopping 231% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron 1007U and GX-210JA processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking28673305
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel CeleronAMD
Power efficiency2.952.52
Architecture codenameIvy Bridge (2012−2013)Temash (2013)
Release date20 January 2013 (11 years ago)23 May 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$86no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron 1007U and GX-210JA 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 speed1.5 GHzno data
Boost clock speed1.5 GHz1 GHz
Bus typeDMIno data
Bus rate5 GT/sno data
Multiplier15no data
L1 cache64K (per core)128 KB
L2 cache256K (per core)1 MB
L3 cache2 MB (shared)no data
Chip lithography22 nm28 nm
Die size118 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature105 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)105 °Cno data
Number of transistors1,400 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Celeron 1007U and GX-210JA 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 configuration1no data
SocketFCBGA1023FT3 BGA
Power consumption (TDP)17 Watt6 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 1007U and GX-210JA. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.286x SSE (1, 2, 3, 3S, 4.1, 4.2, 4A),-64, AES, AVX
AES-NI-+
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
My WiFi-no data
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Flex Memory Access+no data
Demand Based Switching-no data
FDI+no data
Fast Memory Access+no data

Security technologies

Celeron 1007U and GX-210JA technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-no data
EDB+no data
Anti-Theft-no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron 1007U and GX-210JA are enumerated here.

VT-d-no data
VT-x+no data
EPT+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron 1007U and GX-210JA. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3
Maximum memory size32 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidth25.6 GB/sno data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel HD Graphics for 3rd Generation Intel Processorsno data
Graphics max frequency1 GHzno data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron 1007U and GX-210JA integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported3no data
eDP+no data
DisplayPort+-
HDMI+-
SDVO+no data
CRT+no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron 1007U and GX-210JA.

PCIe version2.0no data
PCI Express lanes16no data

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.

Celeron 1007U 0.53
+231%
GX-210JA 0.16

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.

Celeron 1007U 840
+239%
GX-210JA 248

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.53 0.16
Recency 20 January 2013 23 May 2013
Chip lithography 22 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 17 Watt 6 Watt

Celeron 1007U has a 231.3% higher aggregate performance score, and a 27.3% more advanced lithography process.

GX-210JA, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 months, and 183.3% lower power consumption.

The Celeron 1007U is our recommended choice as it beats the GX-210JA in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron 1007U and GX-210JA, 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.


Intel Celeron 1007U
Celeron 1007U
AMD GX-210JA
GX-210JA

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.


3 126 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.5 4 votes

Rate GX-210JA on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron 1007U or GX-210JA, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.