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 330

Reasons to consider the
Intel Celeron M 330

Report a correction

CPUBoss is not aware of any important advantages of the Celeron M 330 vs the Atom N270.

Front view of Intel Atom N270

Reasons to consider the
Intel Atom N270

Report a correction
Much newer manufacturing process 45 nm vs 130 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
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
Has a NX bit Yes vs No Somewhat common; Prevents a common class of security exploits
Higher clock speed 1.6 GHz vs 1.4 GHz Around 15% higher clock speed
Lower typical power consumption 2.03W vs 19.91W 9.8x lower typical power consumption
Newer Jun, 2008 vs Jun, 2004 Release date over 4 years later
Lower annual home energy cost 0.6 $/year vs 5.9 $/year 9.8x lower annual home energy cost
Lower annual commercial energy cost 2.19 $/year vs 21.46 $/year 9.8x 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)

Features Key features of the Celeron M 330  vs Atom N270 

clock speed

Celeron M 330
1.4 GHz
Atom N270
1.6 GHz

L2 cache

Celeron M 330
0.5 MB
Atom N270
0.5 MB

overclocked clock speed (air)

Celeron M 330
1.9 GHz
Atom N270
1.87 GHz

overclocked clock speed (water)

Celeron M 330
1.4 GHz
Atom N270
1.6 GHz

TDP

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Celeron M 330  vs
Atom N270 
Clock speed 1.4 GHz 1.6 GHz
Cores Single core Single core
Socket type
478
479
437

features

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

power consumption

TDP 24.5W 2.5W
Annual home energy cost 5.9 $/year 0.6 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 21.46 $/year 2.19 $/year
Typical power consumption 19.91W 2.03W

details

Celeron M 330  vs
Atom N270 
Architecture x86 x86
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 130 nm 45 nm
Transistor count 77,000,000 47,000,000
Max CPUs 1 1
Clock multiplier 14 12

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 1.9 GHz 1.87 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 1.4 GHz 1.6 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 1.9 GHz 1.87 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 400 MHz 533 MHz
Intel Celeron M 330
Report a correction
Intel Atom N270
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus