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 Z3735F

Intel Atom Z3735F

CPUBoss Winner

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Celeron M 215

Reasons to consider the
Intel Celeron M 215

Report a correction
Slightly better PassMark (Single core) score 487 vs 350 Around 40% better PassMark (Single core) score
Front view of Intel Atom Z3735F

Reasons to consider the
Intel Atom Z3735F

Report a correction
Much newer manufacturing process 22 nm vs 65 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Much better performance per watt 60.81 pt/W vs 1.26 pt/W Around 48.5x better performance per watt
Much more l2 cache 2 MB vs 0.5 MB 4x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Much better geekbench 2 (32-bit) score 2,095 vs 991 More than 2x better geekbench 2 (32-bit) score
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
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
Significantly lower typical power consumption 1.79W vs 21.94W 12.3x lower typical power consumption
More cores 4 vs 1 3 more cores; run more applications at once
More threads 4 vs 1 3 more threads
Significantly lower annual home energy cost 0.53 $/year vs 6.5 $/year 12.3x lower annual home energy cost
Significantly lower annual commercial energy cost 1.93 $/year vs 23.65 $/year 12.3x lower annual commercial energy cost
Better overclocked clock speed (Water) 1.83 GHz vs 1.33 GHz Around 40% better overclocked clock speed (Water)

Benchmarks Real world tests of Celeron M 215 vs Atom Z3735F

GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Celeron M 215  vs
Atom Z3735F 
Clock speed 1.33 GHz 1.33 GHz
Cores Single core Quad core
Socket type
479
BGA 592

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE2
MMX
SSE4
SSE3
EM64T
SSE
SSE4.1
SSE4.2
Supplemental SSE3
AES
Supports dynamic frequency scaling No Yes

power consumption

TDP 27W 2.2W
Annual home energy cost 6.5 $/year 0.53 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 23.65 $/year 1.93 $/year
Performance per watt 1.26 pt/W 60.81 pt/W
Typical power consumption 21.94W 1.79W

details

Celeron M 215  vs
Atom Z3735F 
Architecture x86 x86-64
Threads 1 4
L2 cache 0.5 MB 2 MB
L2 cache per core 0.5 MB/core 0.5 MB/core
Manufacture process 65 nm 22 nm
Max CPUs 1 1

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 1.73 GHz 1.63 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 1.33 GHz 1.83 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 1.73 GHz 1.63 GHz

integrated graphics

GPU None GPU
Label N/A Intel® HD Graphics
GPU clock speed N/A 311 MHz
Turbo clock speed N/A 646 MHz

bus

Architecture FSB FSB
Number of links 1 1
Intel Celeron M 215
Report a correction
Intel Atom Z3735F
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus