Atom CE4150 vs Celeron M U3400
Primary details
Comparing Celeron M U3400 and Atom CE4150 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | Intel Celeron M | no data |
| Architecture codename | Arrandale (2010−2011) | Sodaville (2009) |
| Release date | 24 May 2010 (14 years ago) | 24 September 2009 (15 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Celeron M U3400 and Atom CE4150 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 | 2 (Dual-core) | 1 (Single-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 1 |
| Boost clock speed | 1.06 GHz | 1.2 GHz |
| Bus rate | 2500 MHz | no data |
| L1 cache | no data | 56 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 512 KB | 512 KB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 2 MB | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 45 nm |
| Die size | 81+114 mm2 | 96 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 105 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 382+177 Million | 47 million |
| 64 bit support | + | - |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron M U3400 and Atom CE4150 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 | BGA1288 | Intel BGA 951 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 18 Watt | 7 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M U3400 and Atom CE4150. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| Idle States | + | no data |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | - |
| Flex Memory Access | + | no data |
| Fast Memory Access | + | no data |
Security technologies
Celeron M U3400 and Atom CE4150 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| EDB | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron M U3400 and Atom CE4150 are enumerated here.
| VT-x | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron M U3400 and Atom CE4150. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR2, DDR3 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 24 May 2010 | 24 September 2009 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 1 |
| Threads | 2 | 1 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 45 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 18 Watt | 7 Watt |
Celeron M U3400 has an age advantage of 8 months, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and a 40.6% more advanced lithography process.
Atom CE4150, on the other hand, has 157.1% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Celeron M U3400 and Atom CE4150. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M U3400 and Atom CE4150, 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.
