Celeron M 925 vs Atom N270
Primary details
Comparing Atom N270 and Celeron M 925 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 | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | Intel Atom | Intel Celeron M |
| Architecture codename | DiamondVille (2008−2009) | Penryn (2008−2011) |
| Release date | 2 April 2008 (16 years ago) | 1 January 2011 (13 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $44 | $70 |
Detailed specifications
Atom N270 and Celeron M 925 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) | 1 (Single-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 1 |
| Base clock speed | 1.6 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 0.1 GHz | 2.3 GHz |
| Bus type | FSB | no data |
| Bus rate | 533.33 MT/s | 800 MHz |
| Multiplier | 12 | no data |
| L1 cache | 56 KB | no data |
| L2 cache | 512 KB | 1 MB |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | no data |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 45 nm |
| Die size | 25.9638 mm2 | 107 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 90 °C | 105 °C |
| Number of transistors | 47 Million | 410 Million |
| 64 bit support | - | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| VID voltage range | 0.9V-1.1625V | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Atom N270 and Celeron M 925 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 (Uniprocessor) | no data |
| Socket | PBGA437 | PGA478 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 2.5 Watt | 35 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Atom N270 and Celeron M 925. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE, Intel® SSE2, Intel® SSE3, Intel® SSSE3 | no data |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | + | no data |
| Idle States | - | no data |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | - |
| Demand Based Switching | - | no data |
| FSB parity | - | no data |
Security technologies
Atom N270 and Celeron M 925 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | - | no data |
| EDB | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Atom N270 and Celeron M 925 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | - | no data |
| VT-x | - | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Atom N270 and Celeron M 925. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Maximum memory size | 8 GB | no data |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 2 April 2008 | 1 January 2011 |
| Threads | 2 | 1 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 2 Watt | 35 Watt |
Atom N270 has 100% more threads, and 1650% lower power consumption.
Celeron M 925, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years.
We couldn't decide between Atom N270 and Celeron M 925. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Atom N270 and Celeron M 925, 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.
