Celeron 2955U vs Core i7-2600S
Aggregate performance score
i7-2600S outperforms Celeron 2955U by a whopping 425% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Core i7-2600S and Celeron 2955U processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 1573 | 2724 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.49 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | no data | Intel Celeron |
| Architecture codename | Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) | Haswell (2013−2015) |
| Release date | 9 January 2011 (13 years ago) | 1 October 2013 (10 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $210 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Core i7-2600S and Celeron 2955U 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 | 4 (Quad-Core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 8 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | 2.8 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 3.8 GHz | 1.4 GHz |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 128 KB |
| L2 cache | 256 KB (per core) | 512 KB |
| L3 cache | 8192 KB (shared) | 2 MB |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 22 nm |
| Die size | 216 mm2 | 118 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 69 °C | no data |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 105 °C |
| Number of transistors | 1,160 million | 1,400 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
Compatibility
Information on Core i7-2600S and Celeron 2955U 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 | 1 |
| Socket | 1155 | BGA1168 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 15 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i7-2600S and Celeron 2955U. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | no data |
| AVX | + | no data |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
Security technologies
Core i7-2600S and Celeron 2955U technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i7-2600S and Celeron 2955U are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | no data | + |
| VT-d | + | no data |
| VT-x | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i7-2600S and Celeron 2955U. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR3 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 21 GB/s | 25.6 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | - | - |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Intel HD 2000 | Intel HD Graphics (Haswell) |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i7-2600S and Celeron 2955U.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | no data |
| PCI Express lanes | 16 | 10 |
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.
Core i7-2600S outperforms Celeron 2955U by 425% based on our aggregate 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%
Core i7-2600S outperforms Celeron 2955U by 428% 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%
Core i7-2600S outperforms Celeron 2955U by 118% 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%
Core i7-2600S outperforms Celeron 2955U by 291% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 2.99 | 0.57 |
| Recency | 9 January 2011 | 1 October 2013 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 2 |
| Threads | 8 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 22 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 15 Watt |
i7-2600S has a 424.6% higher aggregate performance score, and 100% more physical cores and 300% more threads.
Celeron 2955U, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, a 45.5% more advanced lithography process, and 333.3% lower power consumption.
The Core i7-2600S is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron 2955U in performance tests.
Note that Core i7-2600S is a desktop processor while Celeron 2955U is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Core i7-2600S and Celeron 2955U, 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.
