Celeron M 430 vs 847

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron 847
2011
2 cores / 2 threads, 17 Watt
0.30
+173%
Celeron M 430
1 core / 1 thread, 27 Watt
0.11

Celeron 847 outperforms Celeron M 430 by a whopping 173% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron 847 and Celeron M 430 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking31133375
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel CeleronCeleron M
Power efficiency1.670.39
Architecture codenameSandy Bridge (2011−2013)Yonah (2005−2006)
Release date19 June 2011 (13 years ago)no data
Launch price (MSRP)$134no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron 847 and Celeron M 430 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 GHz1.73 GHz
Boost clock speed1.1 GHz1.73 GHz
Bus typeDMI 2.0no data
Bus rate4 × 5 GT/s533 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 nm65 nm
Die size131 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature100 °C100 °C
Number of transistors504 millionno data
64 bit support+-
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage rangeno data1.0V-1.3V

Compatibility

Information on Celeron 847 and Celeron M 430 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
Power consumption (TDP)17 Watt27 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 847 and Celeron M 430. 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 430 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 430 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 430. 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) (350 - 800 MHz)no data
Graphics max frequency800 MHzno data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron 847 and Celeron M 430 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 430.

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 847 0.30
+173%
Celeron M 430 0.11

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
+183%
Celeron M 430 169

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.30 0.11
Physical cores 2 1
Threads 2 1
Chip lithography 32 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 17 Watt 27 Watt

Celeron 847 has a 172.7% higher aggregate performance score, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, a 103.1% more advanced lithography process, and 58.8% lower power consumption.

The Celeron 847 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron M 430 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron 847 and Celeron M 430, 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 430
Celeron M 430

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.


2.8 388 votes

Rate Celeron 847 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 25 votes

Rate Celeron M 430 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 430, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.