Athlon X2 L310 vs Celeron 887

#ad
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

Comparing Celeron 887 and Athlon X2 L310 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance rankingnot ratednot rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel Celeron2x AMD Athlon
Architecture codenameSandy Bridge (2011−2013)Conesus (2009)
Release date1 September 2012 (11 years ago)10 September 2009 (14 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$86no data
Current price$300 (3.5x MSRP)$9.79

Detailed specifications

Celeron 887 and Athlon X2 L310 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 speed1.5 GHzno data
Boost clock speed1.5 GHz1.2 GHz
Bus support4 × 5 GT/s800 MHz
L1 cache64K (per core)256 KB
L2 cache256K (per core)1 MB
L3 cache2 MB (shared)no data
Chip lithography32 nm65 nm
Die size131 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature100 °C95 °C
Number of transistors504 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplierNoNo

Compatibility

Information on Celeron 887 and Athlon X2 L310 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 configuration1no data
SocketFCBGA1023BGA / 638 lidless micro-PGA
Power consumption (TDP)17 Watt13 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 887 and Athlon X2 L310. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2MMX, 3DNow, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, AMD64, Virtualization, Enhanced Virus Protection
AES-NI-no data
FMA+no data
VirusProtectno data+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
My WiFi-no data
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+no data
Flex Memory Access+no data
Demand Based Switching-no data
FDI+no data
Fast Memory Access+no data
StatusDiscontinuedno data

Security technologies

Celeron 887 and Athlon X2 L310 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-no data
EDB+no data
Anti-Theft-no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron 887 and Athlon X2 L310 are enumerated here.

AMD-Vno data+
VT-d-no data
VT-x+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron 887 and Athlon X2 L310. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3no data
Maximum memory size16 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidth21.3 GB/sno data
ECC memory support-no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel® HD Graphics for 2nd Generation Intel® Processorsno data
Graphics max frequency1 GHzno data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron 887 and Athlon X2 L310 integrated GPUs.

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

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron 887 and Athlon X2 L310.

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.


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.

Benchmark coverage: 68%

Celeron 887 754
+146%
Athlon X2 L310 306

Celeron 887 outperforms Athlon X2 L310 by 146% in Passmark.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 42%

Celeron 887 272
+134%
Athlon X2 L310 116

Celeron 887 outperforms Athlon X2 L310 by 134% in GeekBench 5 Single-Core.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 42%

Celeron 887 497
+150%
Athlon X2 L310 199

Celeron 887 outperforms Athlon X2 L310 by 150% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 20%

Celeron 887 1877
+90.2%
Athlon X2 L310 987

Celeron 887 outperforms Athlon X2 L310 by 90% in Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

Celeron 887 3597
+106%
Athlon X2 L310 1747

Celeron 887 outperforms Athlon X2 L310 by 106% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

Celeron 887 1414
+63.3%
Athlon X2 L310 866

Celeron 887 outperforms Athlon X2 L310 by 63% in 3DMark06 CPU.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 18%

Celeron 887 48
+117%
Athlon X2 L310 104.35

Athlon X2 L310 outperforms Celeron 887 by 117% in wPrime 32.

Pros & cons summary


Recency 1 September 2012 10 September 2009
Chip lithography 32 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 17 Watt 13 Watt

We couldn't decide between Celeron 887 and Athlon X2 L310. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron 887 and Athlon X2 L310, 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 887
Celeron 887
AMD Athlon X2 L310
Athlon X2 L310

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 14 votes

Rate Celeron 887 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.6 7 votes

Rate Athlon X2 L310 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron 887 or Athlon X2 L310, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.