Atom N450 vs Celeron M 530

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron M 530
1 core / 1 thread, 30 Watt
0.19
+46.2%
Atom N450
2009
1 core / 2 threads, 5 Watt
0.13

Celeron M 530 outperforms Atom N450 by a considerable 46% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron M 530 and Atom N450 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking32503350
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesCeleron MIntel Atom
Power efficiency0.602.05
Architecture codenameMerom (2006−2008)Pinetrail (2009−2011)
Release dateno data21 December 2009 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$64

Detailed specifications

Celeron M 530 and Atom N450 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 cores1 (Single-Core)1 (Single-Core)
Threads12
Base clock speed1.73 GHz1.66 GHz
Boost clock speed1.73 GHz1.67 GHz
Bus rate533 MHz533 MHz
L1 cacheno data56 KB (per core)
L2 cacheno data512 KB (per core)
L3 cache1 MB L2 Cache0 KB
Chip lithography65 nm45 nm
Die sizeno data66 mm2
Maximum core temperature100 °C100 °C
Number of transistorsno data123 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage range0.95V-1.3Vno data

Compatibility

Information on Celeron M 530 and Atom N450 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 configurationno data1
SocketPBGA479,PPGA478FCBGA559
Power consumption (TDP)30 Watt5.5 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M 530 and Atom N450. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE2, Intel® SSE3, Intel® SSSE3
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)-+
Turbo Boost Technology--
Hyper-Threading Technology-+
Idle States-no data
Thermal Monitoring-+
Demand Based Switching--
FSB parity-no data

Security technologies

Celeron M 530 and Atom N450 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT--
EDB++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron M 530 and Atom N450 are enumerated here.

VT-dno data-
VT-x--

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron M 530 and Atom N450. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR2
Maximum memory sizeno data2 GB
Max memory channelsno data1

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataOn certain motherboards (Chipset feature)

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 M 530 0.19
+46.2%
Atom N450 0.13

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 M 530 302
+48.8%
Atom N450 203

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.

Celeron M 530 1615
+188%
Atom N450 560

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.

Celeron M 530 739
+49.6%
Atom N450 494

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.19 0.13
Threads 1 2
Chip lithography 65 nm 45 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 30 Watt 5 Watt

Celeron M 530 has a 46.2% higher aggregate performance score.

Atom N450, on the other hand, has 100% more threads, a 44.4% more advanced lithography process, and 500% lower power consumption.

The Celeron M 530 is our recommended choice as it beats the Atom N450 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M 530 and Atom N450, 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 M 530
Celeron M 530
Intel Atom N450
Atom N450

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 40 votes

Rate Celeron M 530 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 182 votes

Rate Atom N450 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron M 530 or Atom N450, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.