Atom x7-Z8700 vs Celeron G1610

VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron G1610
2012
2 cores / 2 threads, 55 Watt
0.96
+15.7%

Celeron G1610 outperforms Atom x7-Z8700 by a moderate 16% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron G1610 and Atom x7-Z8700 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking25072594
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.03no data
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
Seriesno data7x Intel Atom
Power efficiency1.65no data
Architecture codenameIvy Bridge (2012−2013)Cherry Trail (2015−2016)
Release date3 December 2012 (12 years ago)2 March 2015 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$388no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron G1610 and Atom x7-Z8700 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)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads24
Base clock speed2.6 GHz1.6 GHz
Boost clock speed2.6 GHz2.4 GHz
Bus rate5 GT/sno data
Multiplierno data16
L1 cache64 KB (per core)no data
L2 cache256 KB (per core)2 MB
L3 cache2 MB (shared)0 KB
Chip lithography22 nm14 nm
Die size94 mm2no data
Maximum core temperatureno data90 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)65 °Cno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Celeron G1610 and Atom x7-Z8700 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 configuration11 (Uniprocessor)
SocketFCLGA1155UTFCBGA1380
Power consumption (TDP)55 Wattno data

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron G1610 and Atom x7-Z8700. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2no data
AES-NI-+
AVX+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
My WiFi-no data
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-

Security technologies

Celeron G1610 and Atom x7-Z8700 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-no data
EDB+no data
Secure Bootno data+
Secure Key-no data
Identity Protection-+
Anti-Theft-no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron G1610 and Atom x7-Z8700 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 G1610 and Atom x7-Z8700. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3
Maximum memory size32 GB8 GB
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidth21 GB/s25.6 GB/s
ECC memory support+-

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel HD Graphics for 3rd Generation Intel ProcessorsIntel HD Graphics (Cherry Trail) (200 - 600 MHz)
Max video memoryno data8 GB
Graphics max frequency1.05 GHz600 MHz
Execution Unitsno data16

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron G1610 and Atom x7-Z8700 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported33

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by Celeron G1610 and Atom x7-Z8700 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

Max resolution over HDMI 1.4no data3840x2160
Max resolution over eDPno data2560x1600

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron G1610 and Atom x7-Z8700.

PCIe version2.02.0
PCI Express lanesno data2
USB revisionno data3.0
Number of USB portsno data3

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 G1610 0.96
+15.7%
Atom x7-Z8700 0.83

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 G1610 1526
+15.1%
Atom x7-Z8700 1326

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

Celeron G1610 413
+132%
Atom x7-Z8700 178

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

Celeron G1610 690
+35%
Atom x7-Z8700 511

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.96 0.83
Recency 3 December 2012 2 March 2015
Physical cores 2 4
Threads 2 4
Chip lithography 22 nm 14 nm

Celeron G1610 has a 15.7% higher aggregate performance score.

Atom x7-Z8700, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and a 57.1% more advanced lithography process.

The Celeron G1610 is our recommended choice as it beats the Atom x7-Z8700 in performance tests.

Note that Celeron G1610 is a desktop processor while Atom x7-Z8700 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron G1610 and Atom x7-Z8700, 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 G1610
Celeron G1610
Intel Atom x7-Z8700
Atom x7-Z8700

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.


3.1 236 votes

Rate Celeron G1610 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 21 vote

Rate Atom x7-Z8700 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron G1610 or Atom x7-Z8700, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.