Celeron D 326 vs i7-920
Primary details
Comparing Core i7-920 and Celeron D 326 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2008 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 1.22 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Desktop processor |
| Series | Core i7 (Desktop) | no data |
| Power efficiency | 1.30 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Bloomfield (2008−2010) | Prescott (2001−2005) |
| Release date | November 2008 (16 years ago) | September 2004 (20 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $340 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Core i7-920 and Celeron D 326 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) | 1 (Single-Core) |
| Threads | 8 | 1 |
| Base clock speed | 2.66 GHz | 2.53 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.93 GHz | 2.53 GHz |
| Bus rate | 1333 MHz | no data |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 16 KB |
| L2 cache | 256 KB (per core) | 256 KB |
| L3 cache | 8 MB (shared) | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 90 nm |
| Die size | 263 mm2 | 109 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 68 °C | 68 °C |
| Number of transistors | 731 million | 125 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| VID voltage range | no data | 1.25V-1.4V |
Compatibility
Information on Core i7-920 and Celeron D 326 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 | FCLGA1366,PLGA1366 | PLGA478,PLGA775 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 130 Watt | 84 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i7-920 and Celeron D 326. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE4.2 | no data |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | - |
| Turbo Boost Technology | 1.0 | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | + | - |
| Idle States | + | + |
| Demand Based Switching | - | - |
| PAE | 36 Bit | 32 Bit |
| FSB parity | no data | - |
Security technologies
Core i7-920 and Celeron D 326 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | + | - |
| EDB | + | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i7-920 and Celeron D 326 are enumerated here.
| VT-x | + | - |
| EPT | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i7-920 and Celeron D 326. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR1, DDR2, DDR3 |
| Maximum memory size | 24 GB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 3 | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 25.6 GB/s | no data |
Pros & cons summary
| Physical cores | 4 | 1 |
| Threads | 8 | 1 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 90 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 130 Watt | 84 Watt |
i7-920 has 300% more physical cores and 700% more threads, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.
Celeron D 326, on the other hand, has 54.8% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Core i7-920 and Celeron D 326. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Core i7-920 and Celeron D 326, 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.
