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

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

CPUBoss is not aware of any important advantages of the Celeron M 215 vs the Celeron 220.

Front view of Intel Celeron 220

Reasons to consider the
Intel Celeron 220

Report a correction
More advanced architecture x86-64 vs x86 A 64-bit architecture allows more RAM to be installed and accessed by the processor

Benchmarks Real world tests of Celeron M 215 vs 220

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
220 
Clock speed 1.33 GHz 1.2 GHz
Cores Single core Single core
Socket type
479

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
MMX
SSE
SSE2
SSE3
Supports dynamic frequency scaling No No

power consumption

TDP 27W 19W
Annual home energy cost 6.5 $/year 4.58 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 23.65 $/year 16.64 $/year
Performance per watt 1.26 pt/W 1.24 pt/W
Typical power consumption 21.94W 15.44W

details

Celeron M 215  vs
220 
Architecture x86 x86-64
Threads 1 1
L2 cache 0.5 MB 0.5 MB
L2 cache per core 0.5 MB/core 0.5 MB/core
Manufacture process 65 nm 65 nm
Max CPUs 1 1
Clock multiplier 10 12

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 1.73 GHz 1.48 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 1.33 GHz 1.2 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 1.73 GHz 1.48 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 Celeron 220
Report a correction

Read more

Comments

comments powered by Disqus