Celeron 847E vs Athlon 64 X2 4000+
Primary details
Comparing Athlon 64 X2 4000+ and Celeron 847E processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | no data | Intel Celeron |
| Architecture codename | Windsor (2006−2007) | Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) |
| Release date | May 2006 (18 years ago) | no data (2024 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $111 |
Detailed specifications
Athlon 64 X2 4000+ and Celeron 847E 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 | 2 (Dual-core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 2 | 2 |
| Boost clock speed | 2 GHz | 1.1 GHz |
| Bus type | no data | DMI 2.0 |
| Bus rate | no data | 4 × 5 GT/s |
| Multiplier | no data | 11 |
| L1 cache | 256 KB | 128 KB |
| L2 cache | 512K | 512 KB |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 2 MB |
| Chip lithography | 90 nm | 32 nm |
| Die size | 220 mm2 | 131 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 154 million | 504 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Athlon 64 X2 4000+ and Celeron 847E 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 | AM2 | no data |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 89 Watt | 17 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon 64 X2 4000+ and Celeron 847E. 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 Athlon 64 X2 4000+ and Celeron 847E are enumerated here.
| VT-x | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon 64 X2 4000+ and Celeron 847E. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR3-1333 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 16 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 21.335 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | Intel HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) |
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.
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Chip lithography | 90 nm | 32 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 89 Watt | 17 Watt |
Celeron 847E has a 181.3% more advanced lithography process, and 423.5% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Athlon 64 X2 4000+ and Celeron 847E. We've got no test results to judge.
Note that Athlon 64 X2 4000+ is a desktop processor while Celeron 847E is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon 64 X2 4000+ and Celeron 847E, 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.
