Atom E3845 vs Celeron 1017U

VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron 1017U
2013
2 cores / 2 threads, 17 Watt
0.95
+43.9%
Atom E3845
2013
4 cores / 4 threads, 10 Watt
0.66

Celeron 1017U outperforms Atom E3845 by a considerable 44% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron 1017U and Atom E3845 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking25002741
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel CeleronAtom
Power efficiency5.296.25
Architecture codenameIvy Bridge (2012−2013)Bay Trail-I (2013)
Release date1 July 2013 (11 years ago)8 October 2013 (11 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Celeron 1017U and Atom E3845 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 cores2 (Dual-core)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads24
Base clock speed1.6 GHzno data
Boost clock speed1.6 GHz1.91 GHz
Bus rate5 GT/sno data
L1 cache128 KB64 KB (per core)
L2 cache512 KB512 KB (per core)
L3 cache2 MB0 KB
Chip lithography22 nm22 nm
Die size94 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature105 °Cno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Celeron 1017U and Atom E3845 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 configuration11
SocketFCBGA1023Intel BGA1170
Power consumption (TDP)17 Watt10 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 1017U and Atom E3845. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2no data
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
My WiFi-no data
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Flex Memory Access+no data
Demand Based Switching-no data
FDI+no data
Fast Memory Access+no data

Security technologies

Celeron 1017U and Atom E3845 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-no data
EDB+no data
Anti-Theft-no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron 1017U and Atom E3845 are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron 1017U and Atom E3845. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3
Maximum memory size32 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidth25.6 GB/sno data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel® HD Graphics for 3rd Generation Intel® ProcessorsIntel HD Graphics
Graphics max frequency1 GHzno data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron 1017U and Atom E3845 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported3no data
eDP+no data
DisplayPort+-
HDMI+-
SDVO+no data
CRT+no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron 1017U and Atom E3845.

PCIe version2.0no data
PCI Express lanes16no 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.

Celeron 1017U 0.95
+43.9%
Atom E3845 0.66

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.

Celeron 1017U 1508
+43.3%
Atom E3845 1052

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.95 0.66
Recency 1 July 2013 8 October 2013
Physical cores 2 4
Threads 2 4
Power consumption (TDP) 17 Watt 10 Watt

Celeron 1017U has a 43.9% higher aggregate performance score.

Atom E3845, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 months, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and 70% lower power consumption.

The Celeron 1017U is our recommended choice as it beats the Atom E3845 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron 1017U and Atom E3845, 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 Celeron 1017U
Celeron 1017U
Intel Atom E3845
Atom E3845

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.


2.8 70 votes

Rate Celeron 1017U on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
1.5 18 votes

Rate Atom E3845 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron 1017U or Atom E3845, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.