Phenom II X6 1055T (95W) vs Celeron B840
Aggregate performance score
Phenom II X6 1055T (95W) outperforms Celeron B840 by a whopping 417% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Celeron B840 and Phenom II X6 1055T (95W) processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2807 | 1630 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | Intel Celeron | no data |
| Power efficiency | 1.63 | 3.11 |
| Architecture codename | Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) | Thuban (2010) |
| Release date | 1 July 2011 (13 years ago) | 1 May 2010 (14 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $86 | no data |
Detailed specifications
Celeron B840 and Phenom II X6 1055T (95W) 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 cores | 2 (Dual-core) | 6 (Hexa-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 6 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 2.8 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.9 GHz | 3.3 GHz |
| Bus type | DMI 2.0 | no data |
| Bus rate | 4 × 5 GT/s | no data |
| Multiplier | 19 | no data |
| L1 cache | 64K (per core) | 128 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 256K (per core) | 512 KB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 2 MB (shared) | 6 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 45 nm |
| Die size | 131 mm2 | 346 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 504 million | 904 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron B840 and Phenom II X6 1055T (95W) 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 configuration | 1 (Uniprocessor) | 1 |
| Socket | G2 (988B) | AM3 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 95 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron B840 and Phenom II X6 1055T (95W). You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| FMA | + | - |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| Idle States | + | no data |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | - |
Security technologies
Celeron B840 and Phenom II X6 1055T (95W) technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| EDB | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron B840 and Phenom II X6 1055T (95W) are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
| VT-x | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron B840 and Phenom II X6 1055T (95W). Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR3 |
| Maximum memory size | 16 GB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 2 | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 21.335 GB/s | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Intel HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) (650 - 950 MHz) | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron B840 and Phenom II X6 1055T (95W).
| PCIe version | no data | 2.0 |
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.60 | 3.10 |
| Recency | 1 July 2011 | 1 May 2010 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 6 |
| Threads | 2 | 6 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 45 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 95 Watt |
Celeron B840 has an age advantage of 1 year, a 40.6% more advanced lithography process, and 171.4% lower power consumption.
Phenom II X6 1055T (95W), on the other hand, has a 416.7% higher aggregate performance score, and 200% more physical cores and 200% more threads.
The Phenom II X6 1055T (95W) is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron B840 in performance tests.
Be aware that Celeron B840 is a notebook processor while Phenom II X6 1055T (95W) is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron B840 and Phenom II X6 1055T (95W), ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
