Celeron N4020 vs Core 2 Duo E6700
Aggregated performance score
Celeron N4020 outperforms Core 2 Duo E6700 by 56% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Core 2 Duo E6700 and Celeron N4020 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 2641 | 2345 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 41 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.98 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | Core 2 Duo (Desktop) | Intel Gemini Lake |
| Architecture codename | Conroe (2006−2007) | Gemini Lake Refresh (2019) |
| Release date | no data | 4 November 2019 (4 years ago) |
| Current price | $18 | $236 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Core 2 Duo E6700 and Celeron N4020 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) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 2 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 1.1 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.66 GHz | 2.8 GHz |
| Bus support | 1066 MHz | no data |
| L2 cache | no data | 4 MB |
| L3 cache | no data | 4 MB |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 14 nm |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 105 °C |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
Compatibility
Information on Core 2 Duo E6700 and Celeron N4020 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 | FCBGA1090 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 6 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Duo E6700 and Celeron N4020. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | Intel® SSE4.2 |
| AES-NI | no data | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Speed Shift | no data | - |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | - |
| Idle States | no data | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | no data | + |
| Smart Response | no data | - |
| GPIO | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Max 3.0 | no data | - |
| Status | no data | Discontinued |
Security technologies
Core 2 Duo E6700 and Celeron N4020 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| EDB | no data | + |
| Secure Key | no data | + |
| MPX | no data | + |
| Identity Protection | no data | + |
| SGX | no data | Yes with Intel® ME |
| OS Guard | no data | + |
| Anti-Theft | no data | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core 2 Duo E6700 and Celeron N4020 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
| EPT | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core 2 Duo E6700 and Celeron N4020. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR4 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 8 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| ECC memory support | no data | - |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | Intel UHD Graphics 600 |
| Max video memory | no data | 8 GB |
| Quick Sync Video | no data | + |
| Graphics max frequency | no data | 650 MHz |
| Execution Units | no data | 12 |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Core 2 Duo E6700 and Celeron N4020 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | no data | 3 |
| eDP | no data | + |
| DisplayPort | no data | + |
| HDMI | no data | + |
| MIPI-DSI | no data | + |
Graphics image quality
Maximum display resolutions supported by Core 2 Duo E6700 and Celeron N4020 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.
| 4K resolution support | no data | + |
| Max resolution over HDMI 1.4 | no data | 4096x2160@30Hz |
| Max resolution over eDP | no data | 4096x2160@60Hz |
| Max resolution over DisplayPort | no data | 4096x2160@60Hz |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by Core 2 Duo E6700 and Celeron N4020 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | no data | 12 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.4 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core 2 Duo E6700 and Celeron N4020.
| PCIe version | no data | 2.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 6 |
| USB revision | no data | 2.0/3.0 |
| Total number of SATA ports | no data | 2 |
| Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Ports | no data | 2 |
| Number of USB ports | no data | 8 |
| Integrated LAN | no data | - |
| UART | 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.
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 N4020 outperforms Core 2 Duo E6700 by 56% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 68%
Celeron N4020 outperforms Core 2 Duo E6700 by 56% in Passmark.
GeekBench 5 Single-Core
GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.
Benchmark coverage: 42%
Celeron N4020 outperforms Core 2 Duo E6700 by 7% in GeekBench 5 Single-Core.
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.
Benchmark coverage: 42%
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.
Benchmark coverage: 20%
Core 2 Duo E6700 outperforms Celeron N4020 by 24% in Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core.
Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core
Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.
Benchmark coverage: 19%
Core 2 Duo E6700 outperforms Celeron N4020 by 15% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 19%
Celeron N4020 outperforms Core 2 Duo E6700 by 6% in 3DMark06 CPU.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.64 | 1.00 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 6 Watt |
The Celeron N4020 is our recommended choice as it beats the Core 2 Duo E6700 in performance tests.
Note that Core 2 Duo E6700 is a desktop processor while Celeron N4020 is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Duo E6700 and Celeron N4020, 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.
