Atom N455 vs Celeron 847

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron 847
2011
2 cores / 2 threads, 17 Watt
0.30
+150%
Atom N455
2010
1 core / 2 threads, 6 Watt
0.12

Celeron 847 outperforms Atom N455 by a whopping 150% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron 847 and Atom N455 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking31143353
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel CeleronIntel Atom
Power efficiency1.671.62
Architecture codenameSandy Bridge (2011−2013)Pinetrail (2009−2011)
Release date19 June 2011 (13 years ago)1 June 2010 (14 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$134$64

Detailed specifications

Celeron 847 and Atom N455 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)1 (Single-Core)
Threads22
Base clock speed1.1 GHz1.66 GHz
Boost clock speed1.1 GHz1.67 GHz
Bus typeDMI 2.0no data
Bus rate4 × 5 GT/s533 MHz
Multiplier11no data
L1 cache64K (per core)64 KB (per core)
L2 cache256K (per core)512K (per core)
L3 cache2 MB (shared)0 KB
Chip lithography32 nm45 nm
Die size131 mm266 mm2
Maximum core temperature100 °C100 °C
Number of transistors504 million123 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Celeron 847 and Atom N455 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 configuration1 (Uniprocessor)1
SocketFCBGA1023FCBGA559
Power consumption (TDP)17 Watt6.5 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 847 and Atom N455. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2Intel® SSE2, Intel® SSE3, Intel® SSSE3
FMA+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Turbo Boost Technology--
Hyper-Threading Technology-+
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring++
Flex Memory Access+no data
Demand Based Switching--
FDI+no data
Fast Memory Access+no data

Security technologies

Celeron 847 and Atom N455 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT--
EDB++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron 847 and Atom N455 are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron 847 and Atom N455. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3
Maximum memory size16 GB2 GB
Max memory channels21
Maximum memory bandwidth21.335 GB/sno data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Intel HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) (350 - 800 MHz)Intel GMA 3150
Graphics max frequency800 MHzno data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron 847 and Atom N455 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported2no data
eDP+no data
DisplayPort+-
HDMI+-
SDVO+no data
CRT+no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron 847 and Atom N455.

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 847 0.30
+150%
Atom N455 0.12

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 847 480
+145%
Atom N455 196

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.

Celeron 847 157
+196%
Atom N455 53

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.

Celeron 847 267
+234%
Atom N455 80

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.

Celeron 847 1270
+125%
Atom N455 564

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.

Celeron 847 2408
+179%
Atom N455 863

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.

Celeron 847 993
+103%
Atom N455 490

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.

Celeron 847 80.4
+48.6%
Atom N455 119.5

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.30 0.12
Integrated graphics card 0.34 0.01
Recency 19 June 2011 1 June 2010
Physical cores 2 1
Chip lithography 32 nm 45 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 17 Watt 6 Watt

Celeron 847 has a 150% higher aggregate performance score, 3300% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 1 year, 100% more physical cores, and a 40.6% more advanced lithography process.

Atom N455, on the other hand, has 183.3% lower power consumption.

The Celeron 847 is our recommended choice as it beats the Atom N455 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron 847 and Atom N455, 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 847
Celeron 847
Intel Atom N455
Atom N455

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.


2.8 391 vote

Rate Celeron 847 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.7 245 votes

Rate Atom N455 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron 847 or Atom N455, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.