Atom x5-E3940 vs Celeron 560
Primary details
Comparing Celeron 560 and Atom x5-E3940 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | not rated | 2283 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | no data | 5x Intel Atom |
| Architecture codename | no data | Apollo Lake (2016) |
| Release date | 1 January 2008 (16 years ago) | 26 October 2016 (7 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Celeron 560 and Atom x5-E3940 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 | no data | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | no data | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 2.13 GHz | 1.6 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1.6 GHz |
| L1 cache | no data | 56K (per core) |
| L2 cache | no data | 2 MB (shared) |
| L3 cache | 1 MB L2 Cache | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 14 nm |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | no data |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 103 °C |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| VID voltage range | 0.95V-1.3V | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron 560 and Atom x5-E3940 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 | no data | 1 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | PPGA478 | Intel BGA 1296 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 31 Watt | 9.5 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 560 and Atom x5-E3940. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | - | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | no data |
| Idle States | - | no data |
| Demand Based Switching | - | no data |
| FSB parity | - | no data |
| Status | Discontinued | no data |
Security technologies
Celeron 560 and Atom x5-E3940 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | - | + |
| EDB | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron 560 and Atom x5-E3940 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | - | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron 560 and Atom x5-E3940. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR3-1866 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 8 GB |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | Intel HD Graphics 500 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron 560 and Atom x5-E3940.
| PCIe version | no data | 2.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 4 |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
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
| Recency | 1 January 2008 | 26 October 2016 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 31 Watt | 9 Watt |
Atom x5-E3940 has an age advantage of 8 years, a 364.3% more advanced lithography process, and 244.4% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Celeron 560 and Atom x5-E3940. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron 560 and Atom x5-E3940, 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.
