Atom N270 vs Core 2 Duo U7700

VS

Aggregate performance score

Core 2 Duo U7700
2006
2 cores / 2 threads, 10 Watt
0.27
+200%
Atom N270
2008
1 core / 2 threads, 2 Watt
0.09

Core 2 Duo U7700 outperforms Atom N270 by a whopping 200% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core 2 Duo U7700 and Atom N270 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking31423395
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel Core 2 DuoIntel Atom
Power efficiency2.563.41
Architecture codenameMerom-2048 (2006−2008)DiamondVille (2008−2009)
Release date27 July 2006 (18 years ago)2 April 2008 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$44

Detailed specifications

Core 2 Duo U7700 and Atom N270 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)1 (Single-Core)
Threads22
Base clock speed1.33 GHz1.6 GHz
Boost clock speed1.33 GHz0.1 GHz
Bus typeno dataFSB
Bus rate533 MHz533.33 MT/s
Multiplierno data12
L1 cache64 KB56 KB
L2 cache2 MB512 KB
L3 cache0 KB0 KB
Chip lithography65 nm45 nm
Die size143 mm225.9638 mm2
Maximum core temperature100 °C90 °C
Number of transistors291 Million47 Million
64 bit support+-
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage range0.8V-0.975V0.9V-1.1625V

Compatibility

Information on Core 2 Duo U7700 and Atom N270 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)
SocketPPBGA437
Power consumption (TDP)10 Watt2.5 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Duo U7700 and Atom N270. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE, Intel® SSE2, Intel® SSE3, Intel® SSSE3
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Turbo Boost Technology--
Hyper-Threading Technology-+
Idle States+-
Thermal Monitoring-+
Demand Based Switching--
FSB parity--

Security technologies

Core 2 Duo U7700 and Atom N270 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT--
EDB++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core 2 Duo U7700 and Atom N270 are enumerated here.

VT-dno data-
VT-x+-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core 2 Duo U7700 and Atom N270. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Maximum memory sizeno data8 GB

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.

Core 2 Duo U7700 0.27
+200%
Atom N270 0.09

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.

Core 2 Duo U7700 429
+215%
Atom N270 136

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.

Core 2 Duo U7700 1335
+147%
Atom N270 541

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

Core 2 Duo U7700 2515
+203%
Atom N270 830

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.

Core 2 Duo U7700 1047
+117%
Atom N270 483

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.27 0.09
Recency 27 July 2006 2 April 2008
Physical cores 2 1
Chip lithography 65 nm 45 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 10 Watt 2 Watt

Core 2 Duo U7700 has a 200% higher aggregate performance score, and 100% more physical cores.

Atom N270, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, a 44.4% more advanced lithography process, and 400% lower power consumption.

The Core 2 Duo U7700 is our recommended choice as it beats the Atom N270 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Duo U7700 and Atom N270, 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 Core 2 Duo U7700
Core 2 Duo U7700
Intel Atom N270
Atom N270

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 vote

Rate Core 2 Duo U7700 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.7 252 votes

Rate Atom N270 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core 2 Duo U7700 or Atom N270, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.