Celeron 847 vs Pentium 4 630
Primary details
Comparing Pentium 4 630 and Celeron 847 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | not rated | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | Pentium 4 | Intel Celeron |
| Architecture codename | Prescott 2M | Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) |
| Release date | no data | 19 June 2011 (13 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $134 |
| Current price | $91 | $93 (0.7x MSRP) |
Detailed specifications
Pentium 4 630 and Celeron 847 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 | 1 (Single-Core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 2 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | 3 GHz | 1.1 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3 GHz | 1.1 GHz |
| Bus support | 800 MHz | no data |
| L1 cache | no data | 64K (per core) |
| L2 cache | no data | 256K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 2 MB L2 Cache | 2 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 90 nm | 32 nm |
| Die size | no data | 131 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 67 °C | 100 °C |
| Number of transistors | no data | 504 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
| VID voltage range | 1.2V-1.4V | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Pentium 4 630 and Celeron 847 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 | PLGA775 | FCBGA1023 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 84 Watt | 17 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Pentium 4 630 and Celeron 847. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2 |
| AES-NI | no data | - |
| FMA | no data | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | + | - |
| Idle States | - | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | no data | + |
| Flex Memory Access | no data | + |
| Demand Based Switching | - | - |
| FDI | no data | + |
| Fast Memory Access | no data | + |
| FSB parity | - | no data |
| Status | Discontinued | Discontinued |
Security technologies
Pentium 4 630 and Celeron 847 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | - | - |
| EDB | + | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Pentium 4 630 and Celeron 847 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | no data | - |
| VT-x | - | + |
| EPT | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Pentium 4 630 and Celeron 847. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR3 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 16 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 21.3 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | no data | - |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | Intel HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) |
| Graphics max frequency | no data | 800 MHz |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Pentium 4 630 and Celeron 847 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | no data | 2 |
| eDP | no data | + |
| DisplayPort | no data | + |
| HDMI | no data | + |
| SDVO | no data | + |
| CRT | no data | + |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Pentium 4 630 and Celeron 847.
| PCIe version | no data | 2.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 16 |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
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 847 outperforms Pentium 4 630 by 78% in Passmark.
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%
Pentium 4 630 outperforms Celeron 847 by 26% 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%
Celeron 847 outperforms Pentium 4 630 by 22% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.
wPrime 32
wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.
Benchmark coverage: 18%
Pentium 4 630 outperforms Celeron 847 by 28% in wPrime 32.
Pros & cons summary
| Physical cores | 1 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 90 nm | 32 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 84 Watt | 17 Watt |
We couldn't decide between Pentium 4 630 and Celeron 847. We've got no test results to judge.
Note that Pentium 4 630 is a desktop processor while Celeron 847 is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Pentium 4 630 and Celeron 847, 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.
