Celeron 847 vs Athlon II Neo K325

VS

Aggregate performance score

Athlon II Neo K325
2010
2 cores / 2 threads, 12 Watt
0.26
Celeron 847
2011
2 cores / 2 threads, 17 Watt
0.30
+15.4%

Celeron 847 outperforms Athlon II Neo K325 by a moderate 15% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Athlon II Neo K325 and Celeron 847 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking31513114
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD Athlon II NeoIntel Celeron
Power efficiency2.051.67
Architecture codenameGeneva (2010)Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)
Release date12 May 2010 (14 years ago)19 June 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$134

Detailed specifications

Athlon II Neo K325 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 cores2 (Dual-core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads22
Base clock speedno data1.1 GHz
Boost clock speed1.3 GHz1.1 GHz
Bus typeno dataDMI 2.0
Bus rate2000 MHz4 × 5 GT/s
Multiplierno data11
L1 cache256 KB64K (per core)
L2 cache1 MB256K (per core)
L3 cacheno data2 MB (shared)
Chip lithography45 nm32 nm
Die sizeno data131 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data100 °C
Number of transistorsno data504 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Athlon II Neo K325 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 configurationno data1 (Uniprocessor)
SocketS1FCBGA1023
Power consumption (TDP)12 Watt17 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon II Neo K325 and Celeron 847. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsSSE4A, AMD64, Enhanced Virus Protection, Virtualization, PowerNow, HyperTransport 3.0Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2
FMA-+
PowerNow+-
VirusProtect+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no 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

Athlon II Neo K325 and Celeron 847 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
EDBno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Athlon II Neo K325 and Celeron 847 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 Athlon II Neo K325 and Celeron 847. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3
Maximum memory sizeno data16 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
Maximum memory bandwidthno data21.335 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataIntel HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) (350 - 800 MHz)
Graphics max frequencyno data800 MHz

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Athlon II Neo K325 and Celeron 847 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data2
eDPno data+
DisplayPort-+
HDMI-+
SDVOno data+
CRTno data+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Athlon II Neo K325 and Celeron 847.

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.

Athlon II Neo K325 0.26
Celeron 847 0.30
+15.4%

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.

Athlon II Neo K325 417
Celeron 847 480
+15.1%

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.

Athlon II Neo K325 158
+0.6%
Celeron 847 157

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.

Athlon II Neo K325 287
+7.5%
Celeron 847 267

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.

Athlon II Neo K325 1111
Celeron 847 1270
+14.3%

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.

Athlon II Neo K325 2215
Celeron 847 2408
+8.7%

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.

Athlon II Neo K325 1036
+4.4%
Celeron 847 993

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.

Athlon II Neo K325 87.05
Celeron 847 80.4
+8.3%

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.

Athlon II Neo K325 1
+9.2%
Celeron 847 1

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.26 0.30
Recency 12 May 2010 19 June 2011
Chip lithography 45 nm 32 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 12 Watt 17 Watt

Athlon II Neo K325 has 41.7% lower power consumption.

Celeron 847, on the other hand, has a 15.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and a 40.6% more advanced lithography process.

The Celeron 847 is our recommended choice as it beats the Athlon II Neo K325 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon II Neo K325 and Celeron 847, 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 Athlon II Neo K325
Athlon II Neo K325
Intel Celeron 847
Celeron 847

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.


3.8 9 votes

Rate Athlon II Neo K325 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 391 vote

Rate Celeron 847 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Athlon II Neo K325 or Celeron 847, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.