Atom x7809C vs Celeron 1019Y
Aggregate performance score
Atom x7809C outperforms Celeron 1019Y by a whopping 1530% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 3369 | 1378 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.01 | 32.00 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | Intel Celeron | no data |
| Power efficiency | 1.39 | 9.08 |
| Designer | Intel | Intel |
| Manufacturer | no data | Intel |
| Architecture codename | Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) | Amston Lake (2024−2025) |
| Release date | 1 April 2013 (12 years ago) | 8 April 2024 (1 year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $153 | $117 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Atom x7809C has 319900% better value for money than Celeron 1019Y.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
Celeron 1019Y and Atom x7809C 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 | 2 (Dual-core) | 8 (Octa-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 8 |
| Base clock speed | 1 GHz | 2 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1 GHz | 3.6 GHz |
| Bus rate | 5 GT/s | no data |
| L1 cache | 128 KB | 96 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 512 KB | 2 MB (per module) |
| L3 cache | 2 MB | 6 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 22 nm | 10 nm |
| Maximum core temperature | 105 °C | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron 1019Y and Atom x7809C 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 |
| Socket | FCBGA1023 | Intel BGA 1264 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 10 Watt | 25 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 1019Y and Atom x7809C. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2 | no data |
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| 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 1019Y and Atom x7809C 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 1019Y and Atom x7809C are enumerated here.
| VT-d | - | + |
| VT-x | + | + |
| EPT | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron 1019Y and Atom x7809C. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3/L/-RS 1333/1600 | DDR4, DDR5 |
| Maximum memory size | 32 GB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 2 | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 25.6 GB/s | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Intel HD Graphics for 3rd Generation Intel Processors | N/A |
| Graphics max frequency | 800 MHz | no data |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Celeron 1019Y and Atom x7809C integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | 3 | no data |
| eDP | + | no data |
| DisplayPort | + | - |
| HDMI | + | - |
| SDVO | + | no data |
| CRT | + | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron 1019Y and Atom x7809C.
| PCIe version | no data | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 9 |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
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. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.33 | 5.38 |
| Recency | 1 April 2013 | 8 April 2024 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 8 |
| Threads | 2 | 8 |
| Chip lithography | 22 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 10 Watt | 25 Watt |
Celeron 1019Y has 150% lower power consumption.
Atom x7809C, on the other hand, has a 1530.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads, and a 120% more advanced lithography process.
The Intel Atom x7809C is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Celeron 1019Y in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
