Celeron N3000 vs 847

Aggregate performance score

Celeron 847
2011
2 cores / 2 threads, 17 Watt
0.30
Celeron N3000
2015
2 cores / 2 threads, 4 Watt
0.39
+30%

Celeron N3000 outperforms Celeron 847 by a substantial 30% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron 847 and Celeron N3000 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking30983006
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel CeleronIntel Celeron
Power efficiency1.679.23
Architecture codenameSandy Bridge (2011−2013)Braswell (2015−2016)
Release date19 June 2011 (13 years ago)1 April 2015 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$134$107

Detailed specifications

Celeron 847 and Celeron N3000 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 speed1.1 GHz1.04 GHz
Boost clock speed1.1 GHz2.08 GHz
Bus typeDMI 2.0IDI
Bus rate4 × 5 GT/sno data
Multiplier11no data
L1 cache64K (per core)no data
L2 cache256K (per core)1 MB
L3 cache2 MB (shared)0 KB
Chip lithography32 nm14 nm
Die size131 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature100 °C90 °C
Number of transistors504 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Celeron 847 and Celeron N3000 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 (Uniprocessor)
SocketFCBGA1023FCBGA1170
Power consumption (TDP)17 Watt4 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 847 and Celeron N3000. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2no data
AES-NI-+
FMA+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
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+
Smart Connectno data-
FDI+no data
Fast Memory Access+no data
HD Audiono data+
RSTno data-

Security technologies

Celeron 847 and Celeron N3000 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT--
EDB++
Secure Bootno data+
Secure Keyno data+
Identity Protection-+
OS Guardno data-
Anti-Theftno data-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron 847 and Celeron N3000 are enumerated here.

VT-d--
VT-x++
VT-ino data-
EPT++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron 847 and Celeron N3000. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3
Maximum memory size16 GB8 GB
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidth21.335 GB/sno data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)Intel® HD Graphics for Intel® Celeron® Processor N3000 Series
Max video memoryno data8 GB
Quick Sync Video-+
Clear Videono data+
Clear Video HD-+
Graphics max frequency800 MHz600 MHz
Execution Unitsno data12

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron 847 and Celeron N3000 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported23
eDP++
DisplayPort++
HDMI++
SDVO+no data
CRT+no data

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Celeron 847 and Celeron N3000 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno data+
OpenGLno data+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron 847 and Celeron N3000.

PCIe version2.02.0
PCI Express lanes164
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 data5
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 847 0.30
Celeron N3000 0.39
+30%

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 847 478
Celeron N3000 621
+29.9%

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
+4%
Celeron N3000 151

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 847 262
Celeron N3000 264
+0.8%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.30 0.39
Recency 19 June 2011 1 April 2015
Chip lithography 32 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 17 Watt 4 Watt

Celeron N3000 has a 30% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 128.6% more advanced lithography process, and 325% lower power consumption.

The Celeron N3000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron 847 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron 847 and Celeron N3000, 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 Celeron N3000
Celeron N3000

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.


2.8 384 votes

Rate Celeron 847 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 22 votes

Rate Celeron N3000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron 847 or Celeron N3000, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.