Celeron B810E vs Atom Z650
Primary details
Comparing Atom Z650 and Celeron B810E 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 |
Architecture codename | Lincroft (2010−2011) | Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) |
Release date | 11 April 2011 (13 years ago) | no data (2024 years ago) |
Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $72 |
Detailed specifications
Atom Z650 and Celeron B810E 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 | 1.2 GHz | no data |
Boost clock speed | 1.2 GHz | 1.6 GHz |
Bus type | cDMI | DMI 2.0 |
Bus rate | 400 MT/s | 4 × 5 GT/s |
Multiplier | 8 | 16 |
L1 cache | 56 KB | 128 KB |
L2 cache | 512 KB (per core) | 512 KB |
L3 cache | 0 KB | 2 MB |
Chip lithography | 45 nm | 32 nm |
Die size | 65 mm2 | 131 mm2 |
Maximum core temperature | 90 °C | no data |
Number of transistors | 140 million | 504 Million |
64 bit support | - | + |
Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Atom Z650 and Celeron B810E 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) | 1 (Uniprocessor) |
Socket | T-PBGA518 | no data |
Power consumption (TDP) | 3 Watt | 35 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Atom Z650 and Celeron B810E. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE, Intel® SSE2, Intel® SSE3 | no data |
FMA | - | + |
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
Hyper-Threading Technology | + | no data |
Idle States | + | no data |
Thermal Monitoring | + | - |
Security technologies
Atom Z650 and Celeron B810E technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
EDB | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Atom Z650 and Celeron B810E are enumerated here.
VT-d | - | no data |
VT-x | - | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Atom Z650 and Celeron B810E. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
Supported memory types | DDR2 | DDR3-1333 |
Maximum memory size | 2.93 GB | 16 GB |
Max memory channels | 1 | 2 |
Maximum memory bandwidth | 3.2 GB/s | 21.335 GB/s |
ECC memory support | - | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
Integrated graphics card | PowerVR SGX535 | Intel HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Atom Z650 and Celeron B810E integrated GPUs.
LVDS | + | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Atom Z650 and Celeron B810E.
PCI support | - | no data |
Pros & cons summary
Physical cores | 1 | 2 |
Chip lithography | 45 nm | 32 nm |
Power consumption (TDP) | 3 Watt | 35 Watt |
Atom Z650 has 1066.7% lower power consumption.
Celeron B810E, on the other hand, has 100% more physical cores, and a 40.6% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Atom Z650 and Celeron B810E. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Atom Z650 and Celeron B810E, 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.