HD Graphics 620 vs Celeron 430

VS

Primary details

Comparing Celeron 430 and HD Graphics 620 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the rankingnot ratednot rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
Seriesno dataIntel HD Graphics
Architecture codenameConroe-L (2007−2008)Gen9.5
Release dateJune 2007 (17 years ago)no data (2024 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$50no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron 430 and HD Graphics 620 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 cores1 (Single-Core)no data
Threads1no data
Base clock speed1.8 GHzno data
Boost clock speed1.8 GHz0.35 GHz
L1 cache64 KBno data
L2 cache512 KBno data
L3 cache0 KBno data
Chip lithography65 nm14 nm0.014 μm 1.4e-5 mm
Die size77 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature60 °Cno data
Number of transistors105 millionno data
64 bit support+-
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage range1V-1.3375Vno data

Compatibility

Information on Celeron 430 and HD Graphics 620 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 configuration1no data
SocketLGA775no data
Power consumption (TDP)35 Wattno data

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 430 and HD Graphics 620. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)-no data
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

Celeron 430 and HD Graphics 620 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 Celeron 430 and HD Graphics 620 are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron 430 and HD Graphics 620. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR1, DDR2, DDR3no data
Maximum memory sizeno data65,536 MB 67,108,864 KB 68,719,476,736 B 0.0625 TiB 64 GB

Pros & cons summary


Chip lithography 65 nm 14 nm

HD Graphics 620 has a 364.3% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Celeron 430 and HD Graphics 620. We've got no test results to judge.

Note that Celeron 430 is a desktop processor while HD Graphics 620 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron 430 and HD Graphics 620, 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 430
Celeron 430
Intel HD Graphics 620
HD Graphics 620

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.


2.6 159 votes

Rate Celeron 430 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.9 62 votes

Rate HD Graphics 620 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron 430 or HD Graphics 620, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.