Atom D2500 vs Celeron 847

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron 847
2011
2 cores / 2 threads, 17 Watt
0.30
+100%
Atom D2500
2011
2 cores / 2 threads, 10 Watt
0.15

Celeron 847 outperforms Atom D2500 by a whopping 100% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron 847 and Atom D2500 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking30983301
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel CeleronIntel Atom
Power efficiency1.671.42
Architecture codenameSandy Bridge (2011−2013)Cedarview (2011−2012)
Release date19 June 2011 (13 years ago)1 November 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$134no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron 847 and Atom D2500 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)2 (Dual-core)
Threads22
Base clock speed1.1 GHz1.86 GHz
Boost clock speed1.1 GHz1.87 GHz
Bus typeDMI 2.0no data
Bus rate4 × 5 GT/sno data
Multiplier11no data
L1 cache64K (per core)64 KB (per core)
L2 cache256K (per core)512K (per core)
L3 cache2 MB (shared)0 KB
Chip lithography32 nm32 nm
Die size131 mm266 mm2
Maximum core temperature100 °C100 °C
Number of transistors504 million176 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Celeron 847 and Atom D2500 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)1
SocketFCBGA1023FCBGA559
Power consumption (TDP)17 Watt10 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 847 and Atom D2500. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2Intel® SSE2, Intel® SSE3, Intel® SSSE3
FMA+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+-
Turbo Boost Technology--
Hyper-Threading Technology-+
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Flex Memory Access+no data
Demand Based Switching--
PAEno data36 Bit
FDI+no data
Fast Memory Access+no data
AMTno data-
HD Audiono data+

Security technologies

Celeron 847 and Atom D2500 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-no data
EDB++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron 847 and Atom D2500 are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron 847 and Atom D2500. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3
Maximum memory size16 GB4 GB
Max memory channels21
Maximum memory bandwidth21.335 GB/s6.4 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Intel HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) (350 - 800 MHz)Intel GMA
Graphics max frequency800 MHzno data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron 847 and Atom D2500 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported22
eDP+no data
DisplayPort+-
HDMI+-
SDVO+no data
CRT+no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron 847 and Atom D2500.

PCIe version2.0no data
PCI Express lanes164
Total number of SATA portsno data2
Number of USB portsno data8

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 847 0.30
+100%
Atom D2500 0.15

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 847 478
+98.3%
Atom D2500 241

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.30 0.15
Integrated graphics card 0.34 0.01
Recency 19 June 2011 1 November 2011
Power consumption (TDP) 17 Watt 10 Watt

Celeron 847 has a 100% higher aggregate performance score, and 3300% faster integrated GPU.

Atom D2500, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 months, and 70% lower power consumption.

The Celeron 847 is our recommended choice as it beats the Atom D2500 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron 847 and Atom D2500, 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 847
Celeron 847
Intel Atom D2500
Atom D2500

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.


2.8 384 votes

Rate Celeron 847 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 36 votes

Rate Atom D2500 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron 847 or Atom D2500, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.