Celeron N4120 vs Atom D410
Primary details
Comparing Atom D410 and Celeron N4120 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | 2105 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | no data | Intel Gemini Lake |
| Power efficiency | no data | 24.76 |
| Architecture codename | Pineview (2009−2011) | Gemini Lake Refresh (2019) |
| Release date | 4 January 2010 (14 years ago) | 4 November 2019 (5 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $636 | no data |
Detailed specifications
Atom D410 and Celeron N4120 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) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 1.66 GHz | 1.1 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.67 GHz | 2.6 GHz |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | no data |
| L2 cache | 512 KB (per core) | 4 MB |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 4 MB |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 66 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | 105 °C |
| Number of transistors | 123 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Atom D410 and Celeron N4120 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 | FCBGA559 | FCBGA1090 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 10 Watt | 6 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Atom D410 and Celeron N4120. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE2, Intel® SSE3, Intel® SSSE3 | Intel® SSE4.2 |
| AES-NI | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | - | + |
| Speed Shift | no data | - |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | + | - |
| Idle States | - | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | - | + |
| Smart Response | no data | - |
| Demand Based Switching | - | no data |
| PAE | 32 Bit | no data |
| GPIO | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Max 3.0 | no data | - |
Security technologies
Atom D410 and Celeron N4120 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | - | no data |
| EDB | + | + |
| Secure Key | no data | + |
| MPX | - | + |
| Identity Protection | - | + |
| SGX | no data | Yes with Intel® ME |
| OS Guard | no data | + |
| Anti-Theft | no data | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Atom D410 and Celeron N4120 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | - | + |
| VT-x | - | + |
| EPT | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Atom D410 and Celeron N4120. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR2 | DDR4 |
| Maximum memory size | 4 GB | 8 GB |
| Max memory channels | 1 | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 6.4 GB/s | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | Intel GMA 3150 | Intel UHD Graphics 600 |
| Max video memory | no data | 8 GB |
| Quick Sync Video | - | + |
| Graphics max frequency | no data | 700 MHz |
| Execution Units | no data | 12 |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Atom D410 and Celeron N4120 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | no data | 3 |
| eDP | no data | + |
| DisplayPort | - | + |
| HDMI | - | + |
| MIPI-DSI | no data | + |
Graphics image quality
Maximum display resolutions supported by Atom D410 and Celeron N4120 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.
| 4K resolution support | no data | + |
| Max resolution over HDMI 1.4 | no data | 4096x2160@30Hz |
| Max resolution over eDP | no data | 4096x2160@60Hz |
| Max resolution over DisplayPort | no data | 4096x2160@60Hz |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by Atom D410 and Celeron N4120 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | no data | 12 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.4 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Atom D410 and Celeron N4120.
| PCIe version | no data | 2.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 6 |
| USB revision | no data | 2.0/3.0 |
| Total number of SATA ports | no data | 2 |
| Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Ports | no data | 2 |
| Number of USB ports | no data | 8 |
| Integrated LAN | no data | - |
| UART | no data | + |
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 4 January 2010 | 4 November 2019 |
| Physical cores | 1 | 4 |
| Threads | 2 | 4 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 10 Watt | 6 Watt |
Celeron N4120 has an age advantage of 9 years, 300% more physical cores and 100% more threads, a 221.4% more advanced lithography process, and 66.7% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Atom D410 and Celeron N4120. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Atom D410 and Celeron N4120, 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.
