0 Comments
| Intel Celeron 1047UE vs Atom E3845 |
Released January, 2013
Intel Celeron 1047UE
- 1.4 GHz
- Dual core
Reasons to buy the Intel Celeron 1047UE
![]() | Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes | ![]() | Better turbo clock speed 900 MHz |
VS
Released October, 2013
Intel Atom E3845
- 1.91 GHz
- Quad core
Reasons to buy the Atom E3845
![]() | Significantly more l2 cache 2 MB | ![]() | Higher clock speed 1.91 GHz |
![]() | Much better performance per dollar 2.19 pt/$ | ![]() | Much better performance per watt 11.4 pt/W |
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?
VS
| ![]() | Intel Atom E3845CPUBoss Winner |
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes | vs | No | Somewhat common; Allows for maximum performance when needed, while conserving power and minimizing heat production when not needed | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Better turbo clock speed | 900 MHz | vs | 792 MHz | Around 15% better turbo clock speed | |||
| |||||||
Significantly more l2 cache | 2 MB | vs | 1 MB | 2x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later | |||
Higher clock speed | 1.91 GHz | vs | 1.4 GHz | More than 35% higher clock speed | |||
Much better performance per dollar | 2.19 pt/$ | vs | 0.41 pt/$ | More than 5.2x better performance per dollar | |||
Much better performance per watt | 11.4 pt/W | vs | 3.14 pt/W | Around 3.8x better performance per watt | |||
Significantly higher GPU clock speed | 542 MHz | vs | 350 MHz | Around 55% higher GPU clock speed | |||
More cores | 4 | vs | 2 | Twice as many cores; run more applications at once | |||
Better overclocked clock speed (Air) | 1.92 GHz | vs | 1.4 GHz | More than 35% better overclocked clock speed (Air) | |||
Lower typical power consumption | 8.13W | vs | 13.81W | More than 40% lower typical power consumption | |||
More threads | 4 | vs | 2 | Twice as many threads | |||
Higher Maximum operating temperature | 110 °C | vs | 105 °C | Around 5% higher Maximum operating temperature | |||
Newer | Oct, 2013 | vs | Jan, 2013 | Release date 8 months later | |||
Better overclocked clock speed (Water) | 1.91 GHz | vs | 1.4 GHz | More than 35% better overclocked clock speed (Water) | |||
Lower annual home energy cost | 2.41 $/year | vs | 4.1 $/year | More than 40% lower annual home energy cost | |||
Lower annual commercial energy cost | 8.76 $/year | vs | 14.89 $/year | More than 40% lower annual commercial energy cost |
Benchmarks Real world tests of Celeron 1047UE vs Atom E3845
PassMark Data courtesy Passmark
Celeron 1047UE
1,188
Atom E3845
1,466
PassMark (Single Core)
Celeron 1047UE
520
Atom E3845
398
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | Celeron 1047UE | vs | Atom E3845 |
---|---|---|---|
Clock speed | 1.4 GHz | 1.91 GHz | |
Cores | Dual core | Quad core | |
Socket type | |||
BGA 1023 | |||
BGA 1170 | |||
features | |||
Has a NX bit | Yes | Yes | |
Supports trusted computing | No | No | |
Has virtualization support | Yes | Yes | |
Instruction set extensions | |||
SSE2 | |||
MMX | |||
SSE4 | |||
SSE3 | |||
EM64T | |||
SSE | |||
SSE4.1 | |||
SSE4.2 | |||
Supplemental SSE3 | |||
AES | |||
Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes | No | |
power consumption | |||
TDP | 17W | 10W | |
Annual home energy cost | 4.1 $/year | 2.41 $/year | |
Annual commercial energy cost | 14.89 $/year | 8.76 $/year | |
Performance per watt | 3.14 pt/W | 11.4 pt/W | |
Typical power consumption | 13.81W | 8.13W | |
bus | |||
Architecture | DMI | FSB | |
Number of links | 1 | 1 |
details | Celeron 1047UE | vs | Atom E3845 |
---|---|---|---|
Architecture | x86-64 | x86-64 | |
Threads | 2 | 4 | |
L2 cache | 1 MB | 2 MB | |
L2 cache per core | 0.5 MB/core | 0.5 MB/core | |
Manufacture process | 22 nm | 22 nm | |
Max CPUs | 1 | 1 | |
Operating temperature | Unknown - 105°C | -40 - 110°C | |
overclocking | |||
Overclocked clock speed | 1.4 GHz | 1.92 GHz | |
Overclocked clock speed (Water) | 1.4 GHz | 1.91 GHz | |
Overclocked clock speed (Air) | 1.4 GHz | 1.92 GHz | |
integrated graphics | |||
GPU | GPU | GPU | |
Label | Intel® HD Graphics | HD | |
Number of displays supported | 2 | 2 | |
GPU clock speed | 350 MHz | 542 MHz | |
Turbo clock speed | 900 MHz | 792 MHz | |
memory controller | |||
Memory controller | Built-in | Built-in | |
Memory type | |||
DDR3 | |||
DDR3L-1333 | |||
Channels | Dual Channel | Dual Channel | |
Supports ECC | Yes | Yes | |
Maximum bandwidth | 12,800 MB/s | 12,800 MB/s | |
Maximum memory size | 16,384 MB | 8,192 MB |
Intel Celeron 1047UE ![]() | Intel Atom E3845 ![]() |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$52 | $107 | |
E3845 vs N2807 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$52 | $82 | |
E3845 vs J1900 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$52 | ||
E3845 vs E3940 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$52 | ||
E3845 vs E3950 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$52 | $163 | |
E3845 vs N2930 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$52 | ||
E3845 vs N4200 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$52 | ||
E3845 vs J3160 | ||
Popular Comparisons
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$305 | $300 | |
W3520 vs 2500 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$272 | $350 | |
4790K vs 6700K | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$281 | ||
4200U vs 6410 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$281 | ||
6200U vs 7th Gen A9-9410 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$275 | $161 | |
4005U vs N3540 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$248 | $230 | |
4770K vs 9590 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$250 | $350 | |
6600K vs 6700K | ||