Atom N470 vs Celeron 925
Aggregate performance score
Celeron 925 outperforms Atom N470 by a whopping 100% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 3450 | 3653 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | no data | Intel Atom |
| Power efficiency | 0.31 | 0.78 |
| Designer | Intel | Intel |
| Manufacturer | no data | Intel |
| Architecture codename | no data | Pineview (2009−2011) |
| Release date | 1 January 2011 (15 years ago) | 1 March 2010 (16 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $75 |
Detailed specifications
Basic parameters of Celeron 925 and Atom N470: 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 | 1 (Single-Core) |
| Threads | no data | 2 |
| Base clock speed | 2.3 GHz | 1.83 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1.83 GHz |
| Bus rate | no data | 533 MHz |
| L1 cache | no data | 64 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | no data | 512K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 1 MB L2 Cache | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 45 nm |
| Die size | no data | 66 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 105 °C | 100 °C |
| Number of transistors | no data | 123 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron 925 and Atom N470 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 |
| Socket | no data | FCBGA559 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 6.5 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 925 and Atom N470. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | Intel® SSE2, Intel® SSE3, Intel® SSSE3 |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | - | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | - | + |
| Demand Based Switching | no data | - |
Security technologies
Celeron 925 and Atom N470 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | - | - |
| EDB | + | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron 925 and Atom N470 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | no data | - |
| VT-x | - | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron 925 and Atom N470. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR2 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 2 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 1 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | Intel GMA 3150 |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
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. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.26 | 0.13 |
| Recency | 1 January 2011 | 1 March 2010 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 6 Watt |
Celeron 925 has a 100% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 10 months.
Atom N470, on the other hand, has 483% lower power consumption.
The Intel Celeron 925 is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Atom N470 in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
