Celeron N4020 vs M 420
Primary details
Comparing Celeron M 420 and Celeron N4020 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | 2476 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 83 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | Celeron M | Intel Gemini Lake |
| Power efficiency | no data | 15.39 |
| Architecture codename | Yonah (2005−2006) | Gemini Lake Refresh (2019) |
| Release date | no data (2024 years ago) | 4 November 2019 (5 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Celeron M 420 and Celeron N4020 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) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 1 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | 1.6 GHz | 1.1 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.6 GHz | 2.8 GHz |
| Bus rate | 533 MHz | 15 MHz |
| L2 cache | no data | 4 MB |
| L3 cache | 1 MB L2 KB | 4 MB |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 14 nm |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | 105 °C |
| 64 bit support | - | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
| VID voltage range | 1.0V-1.3V | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron M 420 and Celeron N4020 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 | no data | 1 |
| Socket | PPGA478 | FCBGA1090 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 27 Watt | 6 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M 420 and Celeron N4020. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | Intel® SSE4.2 |
| AES-NI | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | - | + |
| Speed Shift | no data | - |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | - |
| Idle States | - | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | - | + |
| Smart Response | no data | - |
| Demand Based Switching | - | no data |
| GPIO | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Max 3.0 | no data | - |
| FSB parity | - | no data |
Security technologies
Celeron M 420 and Celeron N4020 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | - | no data |
| EDB | + | + |
| Secure Key | no data | + |
| MPX | - | + |
| Identity Protection | - | + |
| SGX | no data | Yes with Intel® ME |
| OS Guard | no data | + |
| Anti-Theft | no data | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron M 420 and Celeron N4020 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 M 420 and Celeron N4020. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR4 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 8 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | Intel UHD Graphics 600 |
| Max video memory | no data | 8 GB |
| Quick Sync Video | - | + |
| Graphics max frequency | no data | 650 MHz |
| Execution Units | no data | 12 |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Celeron M 420 and Celeron N4020 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | no data | 3 |
| eDP | no data | + |
| DisplayPort | - | + |
| HDMI | - | + |
| MIPI-DSI | no data | + |
Graphics image quality
Maximum display resolutions supported by Celeron M 420 and Celeron N4020 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.
| 4K resolution support | no data | + |
| Max resolution over HDMI 1.4 | no data | 4096x2160@30Hz |
| Max resolution over eDP | no data | 4096x2160@60Hz |
| Max resolution over DisplayPort | no data | 4096x2160@60Hz |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by Celeron M 420 and Celeron N4020 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | no data | 12 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.4 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron M 420 and Celeron N4020.
| PCIe version | no data | 2.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 6 |
| USB revision | no data | 2.0/3.0 |
| Total number of SATA ports | no data | 2 |
| Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Ports | no data | 2 |
| Number of USB ports | no data | 8 |
| Integrated LAN | no data | - |
| UART | no data | + |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
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.
Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core
Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.
Pros & cons summary
| Physical cores | 1 | 2 |
| Threads | 1 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 27 Watt | 6 Watt |
Celeron N4020 has 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, a 364.3% more advanced lithography process, and 350% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Celeron M 420 and Celeron N4020. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M 420 and Celeron N4020, 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.
