Celeron 827 vs Phenom II X4 910
Primary details
Comparing Phenom II X4 910 and Celeron 827 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2407 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.15 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | no data | Intel Celeron |
| Power efficiency | 1.12 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Deneb (2009−2011) | Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) |
| Release date | 9 February 2009 (15 years ago) | no data |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $100 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Phenom II X4 910 and Celeron 827 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 | 4 | 1 |
| Base clock speed | 2.6 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 2.6 GHz | 1.4 GHz |
| Bus type | no data | DMI 2.0 |
| Bus rate | no data | 4 × 5 GT/s |
| Multiplier | no data | 14 |
| L1 cache | 128 KB (per core) | 64 KB |
| L2 cache | 512 KB (per core) | 256 KB |
| L3 cache | 6 MB (shared) | 1.5 MB |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 32 nm |
| Die size | 258 mm2 | 131 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 758 million | 504 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Phenom II X4 910 and Celeron 827 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 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | AM3 | no data |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 17 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Phenom II X4 910 and Celeron 827. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| FMA | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Phenom II X4 910 and Celeron 827 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
| VT-x | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Phenom II X4 910 and Celeron 827. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR3-1333 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 16 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 21.335 GB/s |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) | Intel HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Phenom II X4 910 and Celeron 827.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | no data |
Pros & cons summary
| Physical cores | 4 | 1 |
| Threads | 4 | 1 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 32 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 17 Watt |
Phenom II X4 910 has 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads.
Celeron 827, on the other hand, has a 40.6% more advanced lithography process, and 458.8% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Phenom II X4 910 and Celeron 827. We've got no test results to judge.
Note that Phenom II X4 910 is a desktop processor while Celeron 827 is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Phenom II X4 910 and Celeron 827, 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.
