Celeron Dual-Core T1400 vs Atom x7-E3950

VS

Aggregate performance score

Atom x7-E3950
2016
4 cores / 4 threads, 12 Watt
1.17
+172%
Celeron Dual-Core T1400
2008
2 cores / 2 threads, 35 Watt
0.43

Atom x7-E3950 outperforms Celeron Dual-Core T1400 by a whopping 172% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Atom x7-E3950 and Celeron Dual-Core T1400 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking23722974
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Series7x Intel AtomIntel Celeron Dual-Core
Power efficiency9.231.16
Architecture codenameApollo Lake (2014−2016)Merom-2M (2008)
Release date26 October 2016 (8 years ago)1 May 2008 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$57no data

Detailed specifications

Atom x7-E3950 and Celeron Dual-Core T1400 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads42
Base clock speed1.6 GHzno data
Boost clock speed1.6 GHz1.73 GHz
Bus rateno data533 MHz
L1 cache56K (per core)no data
L2 cache2 MB (shared)512 KB
L3 cache0 KBno data
Chip lithography14 nm65 nm
Maximum core temperature110 °C100 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)103 °Cno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Atom x7-E3950 and Celeron Dual-Core T1400 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 configuration1 (Uniprocessor)no data
SocketIntel BGA 1296P
Power consumption (TDP)12 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Atom x7-E3950 and Celeron Dual-Core T1400. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data

Security technologies

Atom x7-E3950 and Celeron Dual-Core T1400 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Atom x7-E3950 and Celeron Dual-Core T1400 are enumerated here.

VT-d+no data
VT-x+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Atom x7-E3950 and Celeron Dual-Core T1400. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3, DDR4no data
Maximum memory size8 GBno data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel HD Graphics 505 (500 - 650 MHz)no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Atom x7-E3950 and Celeron Dual-Core T1400.

PCIe version2.0no data
PCI Express lanes4no 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.


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.

Atom x7-E3950 1.17
+172%
Celeron Dual-Core T1400 0.43

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.

Atom x7-E3950 3769
+38.3%
Celeron Dual-Core T1400 2725

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.

Atom x7-E3950 30.26
+55.3%
Celeron Dual-Core T1400 47

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.17 0.43
Recency 26 October 2016 1 May 2008
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Chip lithography 14 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 12 Watt 35 Watt

Atom x7-E3950 has a 172.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, a 364.3% more advanced lithography process, and 191.7% lower power consumption.

The Atom x7-E3950 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron Dual-Core T1400 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Atom x7-E3950 and Celeron Dual-Core T1400, 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.


Intel Atom x7-E3950
Atom x7-E3950
Intel Celeron Dual-Core T1400
Celeron Dual-Core T1400

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.


2.6 48 votes

Rate Atom x7-E3950 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 285 votes

Rate Celeron Dual-Core T1400 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Atom x7-E3950 or Celeron Dual-Core T1400, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.