Celeron N4000 vs 1017U

#ad
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregated performance score

Celeron 1017U
2013
2 cores / 2 threads
0.98
+2.1%
Celeron N4000
2017
2 cores / 2 threads
0.96

1017U outperforms N4000 by 2% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

General info

Comparing Celeron 1017U and Celeron N4000 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking23522365
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel CeleronIntel Celeron
Architecture codenameIvy Bridge (2012−2013)Gemini Lake (2019)
Release date1 July 2013 (10 years old)11 December 2017 (6 years old)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$107
Current price$299 $305 (2.9x MSRP)

Technical specs

Celeron 1017U and Celeron N4000 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 speed1.6 GHz1.1 GHz
Boost clock speed1.6 GHz2.6 GHz
L1 cache128 KB112 KB
L2 cache512 KB4 MB
L3 cache2 MB4 MB
Chip lithography22 nm14 nm
Die size94 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature105 °C105 deg C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplierNoNo

Compatibility

Information on Celeron 1017U and Celeron N4000 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
SocketFCBGA1023FCBGA1090
Power consumption (TDP)17 Watt6 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 1017U and Celeron N4000. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2Intel® SSE4.2
AES-NI-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Speed Shiftno data-
My WiFi-no data
Turbo Boost Technology--
Hyper-Threading Technology--
Idle States++
Thermal Monitoring++
Flex Memory Access+no data
Smart Responseno data-
Demand Based Switching-no data
GPIOno data+
Turbo Boost Max 3.0no data-
FDI+no data
Fast Memory Access+no data
StatusDiscontinuedDiscontinued

Security technologies

Celeron 1017U and Celeron N4000 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-no data
EDB++
Secure Keyno data+
MPXno data+
Identity Protectionno data+
SGXno dataYes with Intel® ME
OS Guardno data+
Anti-Theft--

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron 1017U and Celeron N4000 are enumerated here.

VT-d-+
VT-x++
EPT++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron 1017U and Celeron N4000. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR4, DDR4
Maximum memory size32 GB8 GB
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidth25.6 GB/s38.397 GB/s
ECC memory support--

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel® HD Graphics for 3rd Generation Intel® ProcessorsIntel UHD Graphics 600
Max video memoryno data8 GB
Quick Sync Video-+
Graphics max frequency1 GHz650 MHz
Execution Unitsno data12

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron 1017U and Celeron N4000 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported33
eDP++
DisplayPort++
HDMI++
MIPI-DSIno data+
SDVO+no data
CRT+no data

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by Celeron 1017U and Celeron N4000 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

4K resolution supportno data+

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Celeron 1017U and Celeron N4000 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno data12
OpenGLno data4.4

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron 1017U and Celeron N4000.

PCIe version2.02.0
PCI Express lanes166
USB revisionno data2.0/3.0
Total number of SATA portsno data2
Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Portsno data2
Number of USB portsno data8
Integrated LANno data-
UARTno 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 1017U 0.98
+2.1%
Celeron N4000 0.96

1017U outperforms N4000 by 2% based on our aggregated benchmark results.


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.

Benchmark coverage: 68%

Celeron 1017U 1508
+2.4%
Celeron N4000 1472

1017U outperforms N4000 by 2% in Passmark.

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

Benchmark coverage: 42%

Celeron 1017U 274
Celeron N4000 324
+18.2%

N4000 outperforms 1017U by 18% in GeekBench 5 Single-Core.

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

Benchmark coverage: 42%

Celeron 1017U 471
Celeron N4000 537
+14%

N4000 outperforms 1017U by 14% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

Benchmark coverage: 20%

Celeron 1017U 2201
+2.3%
Celeron N4000 2152

1017U outperforms N4000 by 2% in Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core.

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

Celeron 1017U 4155
+3.1%
Celeron N4000 4030

1017U outperforms N4000 by 3% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.

3DMark06 CPU

3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

Celeron 1017U 1719
Celeron N4000 2259
+31.4%

N4000 outperforms 1017U by 31% in 3DMark06 CPU.

wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

Benchmark coverage: 18%

Celeron 1017U 46.38
Celeron N4000 31.94
+45.2%

1017U outperforms N4000 by 45% in wPrime 32.

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

Celeron 1017U 1
Celeron N4000 2
+26.9%

N4000 outperforms 1017U by 27% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core.

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R11.5 is an old benchmark by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version loads a single thread with ray tracing to render a glossy room full of crystal spheres and light sources.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

Celeron 1017U 0.61
Celeron N4000 0.89
+45.9%

N4000 outperforms 1017U by 46% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core.

TrueCrypt AES

TrueCrypt is a discontinued piece of software that was widely used for on-the-fly-encryption of disk partitions, now superseded by VeraCrypt. It contains several embedded performance tests, one of them being TrueCrypt AES, which measures data encryption speed using AES algorithm. Result is encryption speed in gigabytes per second.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

Celeron 1017U 0.1
Celeron N4000 0.9
+550%

N4000 outperforms 1017U by 550% in TrueCrypt AES.

WinRAR 4.0

WinRAR 4.0 is an outdated version of a popular file archiver. It contains an internal speed test, using 'Best' setting of RAR compression on large chunks of randomly generated data. Its results are measured in kilobytes per second.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

Celeron 1017U 1150
+51.3%
Celeron N4000 760

1017U outperforms N4000 by 51% in WinRAR 4.0.

x264 encoding pass 1

x264 version 4.0 is a video encoding benchmark uses MPEG 4 x264 compression method to compress a sample HD (720p) video. Pass 1 is a faster variant that produces a constant bit rate output file. Its result is measured in frames per second, which means how many frames of the source video file were encoded per second.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

Celeron 1017U 42
Celeron N4000 47
+12.9%

N4000 outperforms 1017U by 13% in x264 encoding pass 1.

x264 encoding pass 2

x264 Pass 2 is a slower variant of x264 video compression that produces a variable bit rate output file, which results in better quality since the higher bit rate is used when it is needed more. Benchmark result is still measured in frames per second.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

Celeron 1017U 8
Celeron N4000 9
+25.4%

N4000 outperforms 1017U by 25% in x264 encoding pass 2.

Gaming performance

Advantages and disadvantages


Performance score 0.98 0.96
Recency 1 July 2013 11 December 2017
Chip lithography 22 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 17 Watt 6 Watt

We couldn't decide between Celeron 1017U and Celeron N4000. The differences in performance seem too small.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron 1017U and Celeron N4000, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote

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


Intel Celeron 1017U
Celeron 1017U
Intel Celeron N4000
Celeron N4000

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.

User Ratings

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


2.8 64 votes

Rate Celeron 1017U on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 784 votes

Rate Celeron N4000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions and comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron 1017U or Celeron N4000, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.