Celeron G4900 vs Atom E640
Primary details
Comparing Atom E640 and Celeron G4900 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | 2156 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 2.95 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | no data | Intel Celeron |
| Power efficiency | no data | 2.79 |
| Architecture codename | Tunnel Creek (2010) | Coffee Lake (2017−2019) |
| Release date | 14 September 2010 (14 years ago) | 3 April 2018 (6 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $42 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Atom E640 and Celeron G4900 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) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 2 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 3.1 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1 GHz | 3.1 GHz |
| Bus type | no data | DMI 3.0 |
| Bus rate | no data | 4 × 8 GT/s |
| Multiplier | no data | 31 |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 64K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 512 KB (per core) | 256K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 6 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 26 mm2 | 126 mm2 |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 72 °C |
| Number of transistors | 47 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | - | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Atom E640 and Celeron G4900 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 | Intel BGA 676 | 1151 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 3 Watt | 51 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Atom E640 and Celeron G4900. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Atom E640 and Celeron G4900 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Atom E640 and Celeron G4900. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR2 | DDR4 Dual-channel |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 64 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 38.397 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | Intel GMA 600 | Intel UHD Graphics 610 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Atom E640 and Celeron G4900.
| PCIe version | no data | 3.0 |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 14 September 2010 | 3 April 2018 |
| Physical cores | 1 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 3 Watt | 51 Watt |
Atom E640 has 1600% lower power consumption.
Celeron G4900, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 7 years, 100% more physical cores, and a 221.4% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Atom E640 and Celeron G4900. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that Atom E640 is a notebook processor while Celeron G4900 is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Atom E640 and Celeron G4900, 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.
