CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 1007U vs 1000M among laptop CPUs (over 15W)

Performance

Benchmark performance using all cores

PCMark 8 Home 3.0 Accelerated, PassMark and 1 more

Single-core Performance

Individual core benchmark performance

PassMark (Single Core), Geekbench 3 Single Core and 1 more

Integrated Graphics

Integrated GPU performance for graphics

Sky Diver and Cloud Gate

Integrated Graphics (OpenCL)

Integrated GPU performance for parallel computing

CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 4 more

Performance per Watt

How efficiently does the processor use electricity?

Sky Diver, Cloud Gate, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more

Value

Are you paying a premium for performance?

Sky Diver, Cloud Gate, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more

No winner declared

Too close to call

Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?

Thanks for adding your opinion. Follow us on Facebook to stay up to date with the latest news!
VS

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Celeron 1007U

Reasons to consider the
Intel Celeron 1007U

Report a correction

CPUBoss is not aware of any important advantages of the 1007U vs the 1000M.

Front view of Intel Celeron 1000M

Reasons to consider the
Intel Celeron 1000M

Report a correction

CPUBoss is not aware of any important advantages of the 1000M vs the 1007U.

Benchmarks Real world tests of Celeron 1007U vs 1000M

CompuBench 1.5 (Face detection)

Celeron 1007U
3.8 mPixels/s
Celeron 1000M
4.08 mPixels/s

CompuBench 1.5 (Ocean surface simulation) Data courtesy CompuBench

Celeron 1007U
72.25 fps
Celeron 1000M
74.89 fps

CompuBench 1.5 (T-Rex) Data courtesy CompuBench

Celeron 1007U
0.33 fps
Celeron 1000M
-1 fps

GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Celeron 1007U
78,500 MB/s
Celeron 1000M
93,900 MB/s

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Celeron 1007U  vs
1000M 
Clock speed 1.5 GHz 1.8 GHz
Cores Dual core Dual core
Socket type
BGA 1023
rPGA 988B

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Supports trusted computing No No
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE2
MMX
SSE4
SSE3
SSE
SSE4.1
SSE4.2
Supplemental SSE3
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

power consumption

TDP 17W 35W
Annual home energy cost 4.1 $/year 8.43 $/year
Performance per watt 4.38 pt/W 2.11 pt/W
Typical power consumption 13.81W 28.44W

bus

Architecture DMI DMI
Number of links 1 1
Transfer rate 5,000 MT/s 5,000 MT/s

details

Celeron 1007U  vs
1000M 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 2 2
L2 cache 0.5 MB 1 MB
L2 cache per core 0.25 MB/core 0.5 MB/core
L3 cache 2 MB 2 MB
L3 cache per core 1 MB/core 1 MB/core
Manufacture process 22 nm 22 nm
Max CPUs 1 1
Clock multiplier 15 18
Operating temperature Unknown - 105°C Unknown - 105°C

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 1.5 GHz 1.8 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 1.5 GHz 1.8 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 1.5 GHz 1.8 GHz

integrated graphics

GPU GPU GPU
Label Intel® HD Graphics Intel® HD Graphics
Number of displays supported 3 3
GPU clock speed 350 MHz 650 MHz
Turbo clock speed 1,000 MHz 1,000 MHz

memory controller

Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Memory type
DDR3
Channels Dual Channel Dual Channel
Supports ECC No No
Maximum bandwidth 12,800 MB/s 12,800 MB/s
Maximum memory size 32,768 MB 32,768 MB
Intel Celeron 1007U
Report a correction
Intel Celeron 1000M
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus