Celeron 1017U vs i7-680UM

VS

Aggregate performance score

Core i7-680UM
2010
2 cores / 4 threads, 18 Watt
0.78
Celeron 1017U
2013
2 cores / 2 threads, 17 Watt
0.98
+25.6%

Celeron 1017U outperforms Core i7-680UM by a significant 26% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core i7-680UM and Celeron 1017U processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking26442496
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel Core i7Intel Celeron
Power efficiency3.975.28
Architecture codenameArrandale (2010−2011)Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)
Release date27 May 2010 (14 years ago)1 July 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$317no data

Detailed specifications

Core i7-680UM and Celeron 1017U 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 cores2 (Dual-core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads42
Base clock speed1.46 GHz1.6 GHz
Boost clock speed2.53 GHz1.6 GHz
Bus typeDMI 1.0no data
Bus rate1 × 2.5 GT/s5 GT/s
Multiplier11no data
L1 cache128 KB128 KB
L2 cache512 KB512 KB
L3 cache4 MB (shared)2 MB
Chip lithography32 nm22 nm
Die size81+144 mm294 mm2
Maximum core temperature105 °C105 °C
Number of transistors382+177 Millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Core i7-680UM and Celeron 1017U 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 configuration1 (Uniprocessor)1
SocketBGA1288FCBGA1023
Power consumption (TDP)18 Watt17 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i7-680UM and Celeron 1017U. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2
AES-NI+-
FMA+-
vPro+no data
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
My WiFino data-
Turbo Boost Technology+-
Hyper-Threading Technology+-
Idle States++
Thermal Monitoring++
Flex Memory Access++
Demand Based Switchingno data-
PAE36 Bitno data
FDI++
Fast Memory Access++

Security technologies

Core i7-680UM and Celeron 1017U technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+-
EDB++
Anti-Theftno data-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i7-680UM and Celeron 1017U are enumerated here.

VT-d+-
VT-x++
EPT++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i7-680UM and Celeron 1017U. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3-800DDR3
Maximum memory size8 GB32 GB
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidth12.799 GB/s25.6 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel® HD Graphics for Previous Generation Intel® ProcessorsIntel® HD Graphics for 3rd Generation Intel® Processors
Clear Video+-
Clear Video HD+-
Graphics max frequency500 MHz1 GHz

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Core i7-680UM and Celeron 1017U integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported23
eDPno data+
DisplayPort-+
HDMI-+
SDVOno data+
CRTno data+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i7-680UM and Celeron 1017U.

PCIe version2.02.0
PCI Express lanes1616

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.

i7-680UM 0.78
Celeron 1017U 0.98
+25.6%

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.

i7-680UM 1196
Celeron 1017U 1508
+26.1%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.78 0.98
Recency 27 May 2010 1 July 2013
Threads 4 2
Chip lithography 32 nm 22 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 18 Watt 17 Watt

i7-680UM has 100% more threads.

Celeron 1017U, on the other hand, has a 25.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 45.5% more advanced lithography process, and 5.9% lower power consumption.

The Celeron 1017U is our recommended choice as it beats the Core i7-680UM in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core i7-680UM and Celeron 1017U, 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 Core i7-680UM
Core i7-680UM
Intel Celeron 1017U
Celeron 1017U

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.


3.3 4 votes

Rate Core i7-680UM on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 70 votes

Rate Celeron 1017U on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core i7-680UM or Celeron 1017U, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.