C-60 vs Celeron 847

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

Comparing Celeron 847 and C-60 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 segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel CeleronAMD C-Series
Architecture codenameSandy Bridge (2011−2013)Ontario (2011−2012)
Release date19 June 2011 (13 years ago)22 August 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$134no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron 847 and C-60 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 GHz
Boost clock speed1.1 GHz1.33 GHz
Bus typeDMI 2.0no data
Bus rate4 × 5 GT/sno data
Multiplier11no data
L1 cache64K (per core)64K (per core)
L2 cache256K (per core)512K (per core)
L3 cache2 MB (shared)0 KB
Chip lithography32 nm40 nm
Die size131 mm275 mm2
Maximum core temperature100 °Cno data
Number of transistors504 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Celeron 847 and C-60 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
SocketFCBGA1023FT1 BGA 413-Ball
Power consumption (TDP)17 Watt9 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 847 and C-60. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2MMX(+), SSE(1,2,3,3S,4A), AMD-V, Radeon HD 6290 (276-400 MHz)
FMA+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+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 847 and C-60 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 847 and C-60 are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron 847 and C-60. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3 Single-channel
Maximum memory size16 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidth21.335 GB/sno data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Intel HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)AMD Radeon HD 6290
Graphics max frequency800 MHzno data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron 847 and C-60 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported2no data
eDP+no data
DisplayPort+-
HDMI+-
SDVO+no data
CRT+no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron 847 and C-60.

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.



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
+51.3%
C-60 316

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

Celeron 847 157
+107%
C-60 76

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

Celeron 847 262
+89.9%
C-60 138

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

Celeron 847 1270
+65.4%
C-60 768

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.

Celeron 847 2408
+62.3%
C-60 1483

3DMark06 CPU

3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.

Celeron 847 993
+31.8%
C-60 753

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.

Celeron 847 80.4
+7.2%
C-60 86.15

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.

Celeron 847 1
+47.7%
C-60 0

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R11.5 is an old benchmark by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version loads a single thread with ray tracing to render a glossy room full of crystal spheres and light sources.

Celeron 847 0.41
+95.2%
C-60 0.21

Pros & cons summary


Recency 19 June 2011 22 August 2011
Chip lithography 32 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 17 Watt 9 Watt

Celeron 847 has a 25% more advanced lithography process.

C-60, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 months, and 88.9% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Celeron 847 and C-60. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron 847 and C-60, 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
AMD C-60
C-60

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
3.1 240 votes

Rate C-60 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron 847 or C-60, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.