Athlon 300U vs Celeron 927UE
Primary details
Comparing Celeron 927UE and Athlon 300U processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | 1753 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | Intel Celeron | AMD Athlon |
| Power efficiency | no data | 15.38 |
| Architecture codename | Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) | Raven Ridge 2 (2019) |
| Release date | 1 January 2013 (11 years ago) | 6 January 2019 (5 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $107 | no data |
Detailed specifications
Celeron 927UE and Athlon 300U 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 cores | 1 (Single-Core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 1 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 2.4 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.5 GHz | 3.3 GHz |
| Bus type | no data | PCIe 3.0 |
| Multiplier | no data | 24 |
| L1 cache | 64 KB | 192 KB |
| L2 cache | 256 KB | 1 MB |
| L3 cache | 1 MB | 4 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 22 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | no data | 209.78 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | no data | 4940 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron 927UE and Athlon 300U 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 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | BGA | FP5 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 17 Watt | 15 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 927UE and Athlon 300U. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | XFR, FMA3, SSE 4.2, AVX2, SMT |
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| Idle States | + | no data |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron 927UE and Athlon 300U are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron 927UE and Athlon 300U. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR4 Dual-channel |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 64 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 38.397 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | Intel HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge) | AMD Radeon RX Vega 3 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron 927UE and Athlon 300U.
| PCIe version | no data | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 12 |
Pros & cons summary
| Integrated graphics card | 0.63 | 2.98 |
| Recency | 1 January 2013 | 6 January 2019 |
| Physical cores | 1 | 2 |
| Threads | 1 | 4 |
| Chip lithography | 22 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 17 Watt | 15 Watt |
Athlon 300U has 373% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 6 years, 100% more physical cores and 300% more threads, a 57.1% more advanced lithography process, and 13.3% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Celeron 927UE and Athlon 300U. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron 927UE and Athlon 300U, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
