Intel Celeron M 215 vs Atom 230

rumored First seen on June, 2012

Intel Celeron M 215

1.33 GHz
Single core

Front view of Intel Celeron M 215

4.5 Out of 10

Reasons to buy the Intel Celeron M 215

Better PassMark (Single core) score

487

VS

older Released June, 2008

Intel Atom 230

1.6 GHz
Single core

Front view of Intel Atom 230

5.5 Out of 10

Reasons to buy the Atom 230

	Much newer manufacturing process 45 nm		More advanced architecture x86-64
	Higher clock speed 1.6 GHz		Lower typical power consumption 3.25W

	Performance
	Benchmark performance using all cores
Celeron M 215 4.9 Atom 230 4.9 Atom 330 4.9
PCMark 8 Home 3.0 Accelerated, PassMark and 1 more

	Single-core Performance
	Individual core benchmark performance
Celeron M 215 5.4 Atom 230 6.4 Atom 330 6.5
PassMark (Single Core), Geekbench 3 Single Core and 1 more

	Integrated Graphics
	Integrated GPU performance for graphics
Celeron M 215 n.d. Atom 230 n.d. Atom 330 n.d.
Sky Diver and Cloud Gate

	Integrated Graphics (OpenCL)
	Integrated GPU performance for parallel computing
Celeron M 215 0.0 Atom 230 0.0 Atom 330 0.0
CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 4 more

	Performance per Watt
	How efficiently does the processor use electricity?
Celeron M 215 5.3 Atom 230 7.6 Atom 330 6.3
Sky Diver, Cloud Gate, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more

	Value
	Are you paying a premium for performance?
Celeron M 215 n.d. Atom 230 n.d. Atom 330 n.d.
Sky Diver, Cloud Gate, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more

5.5	CPUBoss Score
	Combination of all six facets
Celeron M 215 4.5 Atom 230 5.5 Atom 330 5.1

Winner
Intel Atom 230

CPUBoss recommends the Intel Atom 230 based on its performance and power consumption.

See full details

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

VS

Intel Celeron M 215

Front view of Intel Celeron M 215

Front view of Intel Atom 230

Intel Atom 230

CPUBoss Winner

Join the discussion

Front view of Intel Celeron M 215

Reasons to consider the
Intel Celeron M 215

Report a correction

Better PassMark (Single core) score

487

vs

241

More than 2x better PassMark (Single core) score

Front view of Intel Atom 230

Reasons to consider the
Intel Atom 230

Report a correction

Much newer manufacturing process

45 nm

vs

65 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

Higher clock speed

1.6 GHz

vs

1.33 GHz

More than 20% higher clock speed

Lower typical power consumption

3.25W

vs

21.94W

6.8x lower typical power consumption

Much better performance per watt

6.22 pt/W

vs

1.26 pt/W

Around 5x better performance per watt

Lower annual home energy cost

0.96 $/year

vs

6.5 $/year

6.7x lower annual home energy cost

Lower annual commercial energy cost

3.5 $/year

vs

23.65 $/year

6.7x lower annual commercial energy cost

Better overclocked clock speed (Water)

1.6 GHz

vs

1.33 GHz

More than 20% better overclocked clock speed (Water)

GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

991

501

GeekBench

991

1,064

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

322

308

PassMark (Single Core)

487

241

summary	Celeron M 215	vs	Atom 230
Clock speed	1.33 GHz		1.6 GHz
Cores	Single core		Single core
Socket type
479
437
features
Has a NX bit	Yes		Yes
Instruction set extensions
MMX
SSE
SSE2
SSE3
Supports dynamic frequency scaling	No		No
power consumption
TDP	27W		4W
Annual home energy cost	6.5 $/year		0.96 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost	23.65 $/year		3.5 $/year
Performance per watt	1.26 pt/W		6.22 pt/W
Typical power consumption	21.94W		3.25W

details	Celeron M 215	vs	Atom 230
Architecture	x86		x86-64
Threads	1		2
L2 cache	0.5 MB		0.5 MB
L2 cache per core	0.5 MB/core		0.5 MB/core
Manufacture process	65 nm		45 nm
Max CPUs	1		1
Clock multiplier	10		12
overclocking
Overclocked clock speed	1.73 GHz		1.89 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water)	1.33 GHz		1.6 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air)	1.73 GHz		1.89 GHz
integrated graphics
GPU	None		None
Label	N/A		N/A
Latest DirectX	N/A		N/A
Number of displays supported	N/A		N/A
GPU clock speed	N/A		N/A
Turbo clock speed	N/A		N/A
3DMark06	N/A		N/A
bus
Architecture	FSB		FSB
Number of links	1		1
Clock speed	533 MHz		533 MHz

Intel Celeron M 215

Report a correction

Intel Atom 230

Report a correction

VS

Intel Celeron M 215 vs Atom 330

VS

Intel Atom 230 vs 330

Comments

comments powered by Disqus