Atom N2600 vs Celeron M 550

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron M 550
1 core / 1 thread, 30 Watt
0.29
+26.1%
Atom N2600
2011
2 cores / 4 threads, 3 Watt
0.23

Celeron M 550 outperforms Atom N2600 by a significant 26% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron M 550 and Atom N2600 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking31093179
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesCeleron MIntel Atom
Power efficiency0.915.44
Architecture codenameMerom (2006−2008)Cedarview-M (2011−2012)
Release dateno data (2024 years ago)1 December 2011 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$47

Detailed specifications

Celeron M 550 and Atom N2600 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 cores1 (Single-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads14
Base clock speedno data1.6 GHz
Boost clock speed2 GHz1.6 GHz
Bus rate533 MHzno data
L1 cacheno data64 KB (per core)
L2 cacheno data512K (per core)
L3 cacheno data0 KB
Chip lithography65 nm32 nm
Die sizeno data66 mm2
Number of transistorsno data176 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Celeron M 550 and Atom N2600 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 configurationno data1
Socketno dataFCBGA559
Power consumption (TDP)30 Watt3.5 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M 550 and Atom N2600. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE2, Intel® SSE3, Intel® SSSE3
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Demand Based Switchingno data-

Security technologies

Celeron M 550 and Atom N2600 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
EDBno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron M 550 and Atom N2600 are enumerated here.

VT-dno data-
VT-xno data-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron M 550 and Atom N2600. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR3
Maximum memory sizeno data2.44 GB
Max memory channelsno data1

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataIntel Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 3600 (400 MHz)

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 M 550 0.29
+26.1%
Atom N2600 0.23

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 M 550 465
+29.2%
Atom N2600 360

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.

Celeron M 550 1834
+239%
Atom N2600 541

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 M 550 877
+8%
Atom N2600 812

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.29 0.23
Physical cores 1 2
Threads 1 4
Chip lithography 65 nm 32 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 30 Watt 3 Watt

Celeron M 550 has a 26.1% higher aggregate performance score.

Atom N2600, on the other hand, has 100% more physical cores and 300% more threads, a 103.1% more advanced lithography process, and 900% lower power consumption.

The Celeron M 550 is our recommended choice as it beats the Atom N2600 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M 550 and Atom N2600, 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 M 550
Celeron M 550
Intel Atom N2600
Atom N2600

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 28 votes

Rate Celeron M 550 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 182 votes

Rate Atom N2600 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron M 550 or Atom N2600, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.