Celeron M 380 vs 847

VS

Primary details

Comparing Celeron 847 and Celeron M 380 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 CeleronCeleron M
Architecture codenameSandy Bridge (2011−2013)Dothan (2004−2005)
Release date19 June 2011 (13 years ago)no data (2024 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$134no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron 847 and Celeron M 380 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)1 (Single-Core)
Threads21
Base clock speed1.1 GHz1.6 GHz
Boost clock speed1.1 GHz1.6 GHz
Bus typeDMI 2.0no data
Bus rate4 × 5 GT/s400 MHz
Multiplier11no data
L1 cache64K (per core)no data
L2 cache256K (per core)no data
L3 cache2 MB (shared)1 MB L2 KB
Chip lithography32 nm90 nm
Die size131 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature100 °C100 °C
Number of transistors504 millionno data
64 bit support+-
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage rangeno data1.004V-1.292V

Compatibility

Information on Celeron 847 and Celeron M 380 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
SocketFCBGA1023PPGA478, H-PBGA479
Power consumption (TDP)17 Watt21 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 847 and Celeron M 380. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2no data
FMA+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+-
Turbo Boost Technology--
Hyper-Threading Technology--
Idle States+-
Thermal Monitoring+-
Flex Memory Access+no data
Demand Based Switching--
PAEno data32 Bit
FDI+no data
Fast Memory Access+no data
FSB parityno data-

Security technologies

Celeron 847 and Celeron M 380 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT--
EDB++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron 847 and Celeron M 380 are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron 847 and Celeron M 380. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3no data
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 cardIntel HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)no data
Graphics max frequency800 MHzno data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron 847 and Celeron M 380 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 Celeron M 380.

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.



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
+38.1%
Celeron M 380 111

Pros & cons summary


Physical cores 2 1
Threads 2 1
Chip lithography 32 nm 90 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 17 Watt 21 Watt

Celeron 847 has 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, a 181.3% more advanced lithography process, and 23.5% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Celeron 847 and Celeron M 380. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron 847 and Celeron M 380, 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 Celeron M 380
Celeron M 380

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
4.6 9 votes

Rate Celeron M 380 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron 847 or Celeron M 380, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.