Celeron 667 vs 900

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

Comparing Celeron 900 and Celeron 667 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 segmentLaptopDesktop processor
Architecture codenameno dataTimna
Release date1 January 2009 (15 years ago)no data (2024 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Celeron 900 and Celeron 667 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 coresno data1 (Single-Core)
Threadsno data1
Base clock speed2.2 GHzno data
Boost clock speedno data0.67 GHz
L1 cacheno data32 KB
L2 cacheno data128 KB
L3 cache1 MB L2 Cacheno data
Chip lithography45 nm180 nm
Die sizeno data129 mm2
Maximum core temperature105 °Cno data
64 bit support+-
Windows 11 compatibility-no data

Compatibility

Information on Celeron 900 and Celeron 667 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 configurationno data1
SocketPGA478370S
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt30 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 900 and Celeron 667. 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

Security technologies

Celeron 900 and Celeron 667 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 900 and Celeron 667 are enumerated here.

VT-x-no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataIntel i752

Pros & cons summary


Chip lithography 45 nm 180 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 30 Watt

Celeron 900 has a 300% more advanced lithography process.

Celeron 667, on the other hand, has 16.7% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Celeron 900 and Celeron 667. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Celeron 900 is a notebook processor while Celeron 667 is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron 900 and Celeron 667, 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 900
Celeron 900
Intel Celeron 667
Celeron 667

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.


2.4 53 votes

Rate Celeron 900 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate Celeron 667 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron 900 or Celeron 667, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.