CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 847 vs 50 among all CPUs

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

7.9

CPUBoss Score

Combination of all six facets

Winner
Intel Celeron 847 

CPUBoss recommends the Intel Celeron 847  based on its performance and single-core performance.

See full details

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

Intel Celeron 847

CPUBoss Winner
Front view of Intel Celeron 847

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Celeron 847

Reasons to consider the
Intel Celeron 847

Report a correction
Much better geekbench 3 AES single core score 54,500 MB/s vs 32,500 MB/s Around 70% better geekbench 3 AES single core score
Much better 3DMark06 CPU score 23.4 vs 19.8 Around 20% better 3DMark06 CPU score
Significantly newer manufacturing process 32 nm vs 40 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Higher GPU clock speed 350 MHz vs 276 MHz More than 25% higher GPU clock speed
More l3 cache per core 1 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core 2x more l3 cache per core
Higher Maximum operating temperature 100 °C vs 90 °C More than 10% higher Maximum operating temperature
Better geekbench 3 Multi-Core score 1,460 vs 722 More than 2x better geekbench 3 Multi-Core score
Newer Jun, 2011 vs Jan, 2011 Release date 5 months later
Front view of AMD C 50

Reasons to consider the
AMD C 50

Report a correction
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
Much more l2 cache per core 1 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core 2x more l2 cache per core
Lower typical power consumption 7.31W vs 13.81W More than 45% lower typical power consumption
Lower annual home energy cost 2.17 $/year vs 4.1 $/year More than 45% lower annual home energy cost
Lower annual commercial energy cost 7.88 $/year vs 14.89 $/year More than 45% lower annual commercial energy cost

Benchmarks Real world tests of Celeron 847 vs AMD C 50

CompuBench 1.5 (T-Rex) Data courtesy CompuBench

Celeron 847
0.09 fps
AMD C 50
0.09 fps

GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Celeron 847
1,460
AMD C 50
722

GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Celeron 847
54,500 MB/s
AMD C 50
32,500 MB/s

GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Celeron 847
1,405
AMD C 50
678

GeekBench (64-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Celeron 847
1,596
AMD C 50
741

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Celeron 847  vs
AMD C 50 
Clock speed 1.1 GHz 1 GHz
Cores Dual core Dual core

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE4a
SSE2
MMX
SSE4
SSE3
SSE
AMD64
SSE4.1
SSE4.2
AMD-V
Supplemental SSE3
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

memory controller

Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Memory type
DDR3-1333
DDR3-1066
DDR3

details

Celeron 847  vs
AMD C 50 
Threads 2 2
L2 cache 1 MB 2 MB
L2 cache per core 0.5 MB/core 1 MB/core
L3 cache 2 MB 1 MB
L3 cache per core 1 MB/core 0.5 MB/core
Manufacture process 32 nm 40 nm
Max CPUs 1 1
Clock multiplier 11 5
Operating temperature Unknown - 100°C Unknown - 90°C

integrated graphics

GPU GPU GPU
GPU clock speed 350 MHz 276 MHz

power consumption

TDP 17W 9W
Annual home energy cost 4.1 $/year 2.17 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 14.89 $/year 7.88 $/year
Performance per watt 3.23 pt/W 3.24 pt/W
Typical power consumption 13.81W 7.31W
Intel Celeron 847
Report a correction
AMD C 50
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus