Celeron 847 vs Phenom II X4 820
Primary details
Comparing Phenom II X4 820 and Celeron 847 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 2131 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 2.10 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | no data | Intel Celeron |
| Architecture codename | Deneb (2009−2011) | Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) |
| Release date | September 2009 (14 years ago) | 19 June 2011 (12 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $90 | $134 |
| Current price | $58 (0.6x MSRP) | $93 (0.7x MSRP) |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Phenom II X4 820 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 | 4 (Quad-Core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 1.1 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.8 GHz | 1.1 GHz |
| L1 cache | 128 KB (per core) | 64K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 512 KB (per core) | 256K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 4 MB (shared) | 2 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 32 nm |
| Die size | 258 mm2 | 131 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 100 °C |
| Number of transistors | 758 million | 504 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
Compatibility
Information on Phenom II X4 820 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 | 1 | 1 |
| Socket | AM3 | FCBGA1023 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 17 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Phenom II X4 820 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) | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | - |
| Idle States | no data | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | no data | + |
| Flex Memory Access | no data | + |
| Demand Based Switching | no data | - |
| FDI | no data | + |
| Fast Memory Access | no data | + |
| Status | no data | Discontinued |
Security technologies
Phenom II X4 820 and Celeron 847 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | - |
| EDB | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Phenom II X4 820 and Celeron 847 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | no data | - |
| VT-x | no data | + |
| EPT | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Phenom II X4 820 and Celeron 847. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | 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 Phenom II X4 820 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 Phenom II X4 820 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%
Phenom II X4 820 outperforms Celeron 847 by 330% 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%
Phenom II X4 820 outperforms Celeron 847 by 131% 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%
Phenom II X4 820 outperforms Celeron 847 by 378% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.
Pros & cons summary
| Physical cores | 4 | 2 |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
| Cost | $90 | $134 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 32 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 17 Watt |
We couldn't decide between Phenom II X4 820 and Celeron 847. We've got no test results to judge.
Note that Phenom II X4 820 is a desktop processor while Celeron 847 is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Phenom II X4 820 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.
