CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 420 vs 347 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

4.9

CPUBoss Score

Combination of all six facets

Winner
Intel Celeron M 420 

CPUBoss recommends the Intel Celeron M 420  based on its performance and power consumption.

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 M 420

CPUBoss Winner
Front view of Intel Celeron M 420

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Celeron M 420

Reasons to consider the
Intel Celeron M 420

Report a correction
More l2 cache 1 MB vs 0.5 MB 2x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Much lower typical power consumption 28.44W vs 69.88W 2.5x lower typical power consumption
Much more l2 cache per core 1 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core 2x more l2 cache per core
Much lower annual home energy cost 8.43 $/year vs 20.72 $/year 2.5x lower annual home energy cost
Much lower annual commercial energy cost 30.66 $/year vs 75.34 $/year 2.5x lower annual commercial energy cost
Better performance per watt 1.57 pt/W vs 0.47 pt/W More than 3.2x better performance per watt
Newer Apr, 2007 vs Oct, 2006 Release date 6 months later
Better overclocked clock speed (Water) 3.38 GHz vs 3.07 GHz More than 10% better overclocked clock speed (Water)
Front view of Intel Celeron D 347

Reasons to consider the
Intel Celeron D 347

Report a correction
Much higher clock speed 3.06 GHz vs 1.6 GHz More than 90% higher clock speed
Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.59 GHz vs 2.02 GHz More than 2.2x better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Higher Maximum operating temperature 69.2 °C vs 60.4 °C Around 15% higher Maximum operating temperature

Benchmarks Real world tests of Celeron M 420 vs D 347

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Celeron M 420  vs
D 347 
Clock speed 1.6 GHz 3.06 GHz
Cores Single core Single core
Socket type
LGA 775
478

features

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

power consumption

TDP 35W 86W
Annual home energy cost 8.43 $/year 20.72 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 30.66 $/year 75.34 $/year
Performance per watt 1.57 pt/W 0.47 pt/W
Typical power consumption 28.44W 69.88W

bus

Architecture FSB FSB
Number of links 1 1
Clock speed 800 MHz 533 MHz

details

Celeron M 420  vs
D 347 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 1 1
L2 cache 1 MB 0.5 MB
L2 cache per core 1 MB/core 0.5 MB/core
Manufacture process 65 nm 65 nm
Transistor count 105,000,000 188,000,000
Max CPUs 1 1
Clock multiplier 8 23
Voltage range 1 - 1.34V 1.25 - 1.32V
Operating temperature Unknown - 60.4°C Unknown - 69.2°C

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 2.02 GHz 4.59 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 3.38 GHz 3.07 GHz
PassMark (Overclocked) 1,365.1 784.9
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.02 GHz 4.59 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
Intel Celeron M 420
Report a correction
Intel Celeron D 347
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus