Atom D410 vs Celeron N3050
Primary details
Comparing Celeron N3050 and Atom D410 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | not rated | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | Intel Celeron | no data |
| Architecture codename | Braswell (2015−2016) | Pineview (2009−2011) |
| Release date | 1 April 2015 (9 years ago) | 4 January 2010 (14 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $107 | $636 |
Detailed specifications
Celeron N3050 and Atom D410 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 | 2 |
| Boost clock speed | 1.6 GHz | 1.67 GHz |
| L1 cache | no data | 64 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 512 KB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 45 nm |
| Die size | no data | 66 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 90 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | no data | 123 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron N3050 and Atom D410 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 | 1 (Uniprocessor) | 1 |
| Socket | FCBGA1170 | Intel BGA 437 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 6 Watt | 10 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron N3050 and Atom D410. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | no data |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron N3050 and Atom D410. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR2 |
| Maximum memory size | 8 GB | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 6.4 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | - | - |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | Intel HD Graphics (Braswell) | Intel GMA 3150 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron N3050 and Atom D410.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | no data |
| PCI Express lanes | 4 | no 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.
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 1 April 2015 | 4 January 2010 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 1 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 45 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 6 Watt | 10 Watt |
Celeron N3050 has an age advantage of 5 years, 100% more physical cores, a 221.4% more advanced lithography process, and 66.7% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Celeron N3050 and Atom D410. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron N3050 and Atom D410, 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.
