Atom x7405C vs Celeron D 330
Primary details
Comparing Celeron D 330 and Atom x7405C processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Architecture codename | Prescott (2001−2005) | Amston Lake (2024) |
| Release date | June 2004 (20 years ago) | 8 April 2024 (less than a year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $57 |
Detailed specifications
Celeron D 330 and Atom x7405C 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 | 1 (Single-Core) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 1 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 2.66 GHz | 1.7 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.67 GHz | 3.4 GHz |
| L1 cache | 16 KB | 96 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 256 KB | 2 MB (shared) |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 6 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 90 nm | 10 nm |
| Die size | 109 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | 67 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 125 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | - | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | no data |
| VID voltage range | 1.25V-1.4V | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron D 330 and Atom x7405C 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 | 1 |
| Socket | PPGA478 | Intel BGA 1264 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 73 Watt | 12 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron D 330 and Atom x7405C. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | - | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | no data |
| Idle States | - | no data |
| Demand Based Switching | - | no data |
| PAE | 32 Bit | no data |
| FSB parity | - | no data |
Security technologies
Celeron D 330 and Atom x7405C 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 D 330 and Atom x7405C are enumerated here.
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | - | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron D 330 and Atom x7405C. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR1, DDR2, DDR3 | DDR4, DDR5 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | N/A |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron D 330 and Atom x7405C.
| PCIe version | no data | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 9 |
Pros & cons summary
| Physical cores | 1 | 4 |
| Threads | 1 | 4 |
| Chip lithography | 90 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 73 Watt | 12 Watt |
Atom x7405C has 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads, a 800% more advanced lithography process, and 508.3% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Celeron D 330 and Atom x7405C. We've got no test results to judge.
Note that Celeron D 330 is a desktop processor while Atom x7405C is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron D 330 and Atom x7405C, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
