Atom x7-Z8750 vs Celeron 2950M
Aggregate performance score
Atom x7-Z8750 outperforms Celeron 2950M by a minimal 3% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Celeron 2950M and Atom x7-Z8750 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2642 | 2619 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | Intel Celeron | 7x Intel Atom |
| Power efficiency | 2.00 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Haswell (2013−2015) | Cherry Trail (2015−2016) |
| Release date | 1 September 2013 (11 years ago) | 1 April 2016 (8 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $75 | $37 |
Detailed specifications
Celeron 2950M and Atom x7-Z8750 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) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 2 GHz | 1.6 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2 GHz | 2.56 GHz |
| Bus rate | 5 GT/s | no data |
| Multiplier | no data | 16 |
| L1 cache | 64K (per core) | no data |
| L2 cache | 256K (per core) | 2 MB |
| L3 cache | 2 MB (shared) | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 22 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 118 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | 90 °C |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 105 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 1,400 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron 2950M and Atom x7-Z8750 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 | FCPGA946 | UTFCBGA1380 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 37 Watt | no data |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 2950M and Atom x7-Z8750. 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 | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | no data |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | - |
| Turbo Boost Max 3.0 | no data | - |
Security technologies
Celeron 2950M and Atom x7-Z8750 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | - | no data |
| EDB | + | no data |
| Secure Boot | no data | + |
| Secure Key | + | no data |
| Identity Protection | - | + |
| Anti-Theft | - | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron 2950M and Atom x7-Z8750 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
| VT-d | - | no data |
| VT-x | + | + |
| EPT | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron 2950M and Atom x7-Z8750. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR3 |
| Maximum memory size | 32 GB | 8 GB |
| Max memory channels | 2 | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 25.6 GB/s | 25.6 GB/s |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | Intel HD Graphics for 4th Generation Intel Processors | Intel HD Graphics 405 (Braswell) (400 - 600 MHz) |
| Max video memory | no data | 8 GB |
| Graphics max frequency | 1.1 GHz | 600 MHz |
| Execution Units | no data | 16 |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Celeron 2950M and Atom x7-Z8750 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | 3 | 3 |
| eDP | + | no data |
| DisplayPort | + | - |
| HDMI | + | - |
| VGA | + | no data |
Graphics image quality
Maximum display resolutions supported by Celeron 2950M and Atom x7-Z8750 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.
| Max resolution over HDMI 1.4 | no data | 3840x2160 |
| Max resolution over eDP | no data | 2560x1600 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron 2950M and Atom x7-Z8750.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | 2.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 16 | 2 |
| USB revision | no data | 3.0 |
| Number of USB ports | no data | 3 |
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.78 | 0.80 |
| Integrated graphics card | 0.77 | 0.73 |
| Recency | 1 September 2013 | 1 April 2016 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 4 |
| Threads | 2 | 4 |
| Chip lithography | 22 nm | 14 nm |
Celeron 2950M has 5.5% faster integrated GPU.
Atom x7-Z8750, on the other hand, has a 2.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and a 57.1% more advanced lithography process.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Celeron 2950M and Atom x7-Z8750.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron 2950M and Atom x7-Z8750, 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.
