Celeron 1007U vs E-450

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

E-450
2011
2 cores / 2 threads, 18 Watt
0.48
Celeron 1007U
2013
2 cores / 2 threads, 17 Watt
0.53
+10.4%

Celeron 1007U outperforms E-450 by a moderate 10% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing E-450 and Celeron 1007U processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking29102867
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD E-SeriesIntel Celeron
Power efficiency2.522.95
Architecture codenameZacate (2011−2013)Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)
Release date22 August 2011 (13 years ago)20 January 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$86

Detailed specifications

E-450 and Celeron 1007U 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)
Threads22
Base clock speedno data1.5 GHz
Boost clock speed1.65 GHz1.5 GHz
Bus typeno dataDMI
Bus rateno data5 GT/s
Multiplierno data15
L1 cache64K (per core)64K (per core)
L2 cache512K (per core)256K (per core)
L3 cache0 KB2 MB (shared)
Chip lithography40 nm22 nm
Die size75 mm2118 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data105 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data105 °C
Number of transistorsno data1,400 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on E-450 and Celeron 1007U 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 configuration11
SocketFT1 BGA 413-BallFCBGA1023
Power consumption (TDP)18 Watt17 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by E-450 and Celeron 1007U. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsMMX(+), SSE(1,2,3,3S,4A), AMD-VIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
My WiFino data-
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Flex Memory Accessno data+
Demand Based Switchingno data-
FDIno data+
Fast Memory Accessno data+

Security technologies

E-450 and Celeron 1007U technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
EDBno data+
Anti-Theftno data-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by E-450 and Celeron 1007U are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-dno data-
VT-xno data+
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by E-450 and Celeron 1007U. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3 Single-channelDDR3
Maximum memory sizeno data32 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
Maximum memory bandwidthno data25.6 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon HD 6320Intel HD Graphics for 3rd Generation Intel Processors
Graphics max frequencyno data1 GHz

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of E-450 and Celeron 1007U integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data3
eDPno data+
DisplayPort-+
HDMI-+
SDVOno data+
CRTno data+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by E-450 and Celeron 1007U.

PCIe versionno data2.0
PCI Express lanesno data16

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.

E-450 0.48
Celeron 1007U 0.53
+10.4%

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.

E-450 765
Celeron 1007U 840
+9.8%

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.

E-450 109
Celeron 1007U 252
+131%

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.

E-450 178
Celeron 1007U 422
+137%

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.

E-450 1035
Celeron 1007U 1610
+55.6%

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.

E-450 1
Celeron 1007U 1
+95.2%

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R11.5 is an old benchmark by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version loads a single thread with ray tracing to render a glossy room full of crystal spheres and light sources.

E-450 0.32
Celeron 1007U 0.63
+96.9%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.48 0.53
Integrated graphics card 0.38 0.77
Recency 22 August 2011 20 January 2013
Chip lithography 40 nm 22 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 18 Watt 17 Watt

Celeron 1007U has a 10.4% higher aggregate performance score, 102.6% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 1 year, a 81.8% more advanced lithography process, and 5.9% lower power consumption.

The Celeron 1007U is our recommended choice as it beats the E-450 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between E-450 and Celeron 1007U, 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.


AMD E-450
E-450
Intel Celeron 1007U
Celeron 1007U

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.


2.7 539 votes

Rate E-450 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 126 votes

Rate Celeron 1007U on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about E-450 or Celeron 1007U, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.