Ultra 7 265KF vs Celeron 847

VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron 847
2011
2 cores / 2 threads, 17 Watt
0.30
Core Ultra 7 265KF
2024
20 cores / 20 threads, 125 Watt
37.03
+12243%

Core Ultra 7 265KF outperforms Celeron 847 by a whopping 12243% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron 847 and Core Ultra 7 265KF processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking311489
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data97.65
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesIntel Celeronno data
Power efficiency1.6728.04
Architecture codenameSandy Bridge (2011−2013)Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025)
Release date19 June 2011 (13 years ago)24 October 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$134$379

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron 847 and Core Ultra 7 265KF 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)20 (Icosa-Core)
Threads220
Base clock speed1.1 GHz3.9 GHz
Boost clock speed1.1 GHz5.5 GHz
Bus typeDMI 2.0no data
Bus rate4 × 5 GT/sno data
Multiplier11no data
L1 cache64K (per core)112 KB (per core)
L2 cache256K (per core)3 MB (per core)
L3 cache2 MB (shared)30 MB (shared)
Chip lithography32 nm3 nm
Die size131 mm2243 mm2
Maximum core temperature100 °Cno data
Number of transistors504 million17,800 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data
Unlocked multiplier-+

Compatibility

Information on Celeron 847 and Core Ultra 7 265KF 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
SocketFCBGA10231851
Power consumption (TDP)17 Watt125 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 847 and Core Ultra 7 265KF. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2no data
AES-NI-+
FMA+-
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
TSX-+
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 847 and Core Ultra 7 265KF 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 847 and Core Ultra 7 265KF 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 Core Ultra 7 265KF. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR5
Maximum memory size16 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidth21.335 GB/sno data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) (350 - 800 MHz)N/A
Graphics max frequency800 MHzno data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron 847 and Core Ultra 7 265KF 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 Core Ultra 7 265KF.

PCIe version2.05.0
PCI Express lanes1620

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
Ultra 7 265KF 37.03
+12243%

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
Ultra 7 265KF 58817
+12154%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.30 37.03
Recency 19 June 2011 24 October 2024
Physical cores 2 20
Threads 2 20
Chip lithography 32 nm 3 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 17 Watt 125 Watt

Celeron 847 has 635.3% lower power consumption.

Ultra 7 265KF, on the other hand, has a 12243.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 13 years, 900% more physical cores and 900% more threads, and a 966.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Core Ultra 7 265KF is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron 847 in performance tests.

Be aware that Celeron 847 is a notebook processor while Core Ultra 7 265KF is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron 847 and Core Ultra 7 265KF, 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 Core Ultra 7 265KF
Core Ultra 7 265KF

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
3.8 40 votes

Rate Core Ultra 7 265KF on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron 847 or Core Ultra 7 265KF, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.