C-30 vs Celeron B800

VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron B800
2011
2 cores / 2 threads, 35 Watt
0.42
+282%

Celeron B800 outperforms C-30 by a whopping 282% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron B800 and C-30 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking29873373
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel CeleronAMD C-Series
Power efficiency1.141.16
Architecture codenameSandy Bridge (2011−2013)Ontario (2011−2012)
Release date19 June 2011 (13 years ago)4 January 2011 (14 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$80no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron B800 and C-30 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
Boost clock speed1.5 GHz1.2 GHz
Bus typeDMI 2.0no data
Bus rate4 × 5 GT/sno data
Multiplier15no data
L1 cache64K (per core)64 KB
L2 cache256K (per core)512 KB
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 B800 and C-30 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
SocketG2 (988B)FT1 BGA 413-Ball
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt9 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron B800 and C-30. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno data40 nm, 1.24-1.35V
FMA+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-

Security technologies

Celeron B800 and C-30 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

EDB+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron B800 and C-30 are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
VT-x+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron B800 and C-30. 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) (650 - 1000 MHz)AMD Radeon HD 6250

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 B800 0.42
+282%
C-30 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 B800 670
+276%
C-30 178

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 B800 1534
+281%
C-30 403

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.42 0.11
Integrated graphics card 0.34 0.24
Recency 19 June 2011 4 January 2011
Physical cores 2 1
Threads 2 1
Chip lithography 32 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 9 Watt

Celeron B800 has a 281.8% higher aggregate performance score, 41.7% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 5 months, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and a 25% more advanced lithography process.

C-30, on the other hand, has 288.9% lower power consumption.

The Celeron B800 is our recommended choice as it beats the C-30 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron B800 and C-30, 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 B800
Celeron B800
AMD C-30
C-30

Other comparisons

We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


2.6 200 votes

Rate Celeron B800 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
1.9 18 votes

Rate C-30 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron B800 or C-30, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.