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
Front view of Intel Atom N270

Intel Atom N270

CPUBoss Winner

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Celeron 1047UE

Reasons to consider the
Intel Celeron 1047UE

Report a correction
Much newer manufacturing process 22 nm vs 45 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
More advanced architecture x86-64 vs x86 A 64-bit architecture allows more RAM to be installed and accessed by the processor
Has a built-in GPU Yes vs No Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required
More l2 cache 1 MB vs 0.5 MB 2x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Has virtualization support Yes vs No Somewhat common; Boosts performance of virtual machines
Newer Jan, 2013 vs Jun, 2008 Release date over 4 years later
Better PassMark (Single core) score 520 vs 236 Around 2.2x better PassMark (Single core) score
More cores 2 vs 1 Twice as many cores; run more applications at once
Front view of Intel Atom N270

Reasons to consider the
Intel Atom N270

Report a correction
Higher clock speed 1.6 GHz vs 1.4 GHz Around 15% higher clock speed
Much better performance per watt 9.71 pt/W vs 3.14 pt/W More than 3x better performance per watt
Significantly better performance per dollar 0.76 pt/$ vs 0.41 pt/$ Around 85% better performance per dollar
Lower typical power consumption 2.03W vs 13.81W 6.8x lower typical power consumption
Better overclocked clock speed (Air) 1.87 GHz vs 1.4 GHz Around 35% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Lower annual home energy cost 0.6 $/year vs 4.1 $/year 6.8x lower annual home energy cost
Lower annual commercial energy cost 2.19 $/year vs 14.89 $/year 6.8x lower annual commercial energy cost
Slightly better overclocked clock speed (Water) 1.6 GHz vs 1.4 GHz Around 15% better overclocked clock speed (Water)

Benchmarks Real world tests of Celeron 1047UE vs Atom N270

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Celeron 1047UE  vs
Atom N270 
Clock speed 1.4 GHz 1.6 GHz
Cores Dual core Single core
Socket type
BGA 1023
437

features

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

power consumption

TDP 17W 2.5W
Annual home energy cost 4.1 $/year 0.6 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 14.89 $/year 2.19 $/year
Performance per watt 3.14 pt/W 9.71 pt/W
Typical power consumption 13.81W 2.03W

details

Celeron 1047UE  vs
Atom N270 
Architecture x86-64 x86
Threads 2 2
L2 cache 1 MB 0.5 MB
L2 cache per core 0.5 MB/core 0.5 MB/core
Manufacture process 22 nm 45 nm
Max CPUs 1 1

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 1.4 GHz 1.87 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 1.4 GHz 1.6 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 1.4 GHz 1.87 GHz

integrated graphics

GPU GPU None
Label Intel® HD Graphics N/A
Number of displays supported 2 N/A
GPU clock speed 350 MHz N/A
Turbo clock speed 900 MHz N/A

bus

Architecture DMI FSB
Number of links 1 1
Intel Celeron 1047UE
Report a correction
Intel Atom N270
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus