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 N3050

Reasons to consider the
Intel Celeron N3050

Report a correction
Has a built-in GPU Yes vs No Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required
Has virtualization support Yes vs No Somewhat common; Boosts performance of virtual machines
Front view of AMD Athlon 64 X2 42

Reasons to consider the
AMD Athlon 64 X2 42

Report a correction

CPUBoss is not aware of any important advantages of the AMD Athlon 64 X2 42 vs the Intel Celeron N3050.

Benchmarks Real world tests of Celeron N3050 vs Athlon 64 X2 42

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Celeron N3050  vs
Athlon 64 X2 42 
Clock speed 1.6 GHz 1.6 GHz
Cores Dual core Dual core

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Has virtualization support Yes No
Instruction set extensions
SSE2
MMX
SSE3
SSE
3DNow!
AES

power consumption

TDP 6W 20W
Annual home energy cost 1.45 $/year 4.82 $/year
Performance per watt 8.65 pt/W 2.21 pt/W
Typical power consumption 4.88W 16.25W

details

Celeron N3050  vs
Athlon 64 X2 42 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 2 2
L2 cache 2 MB 1 MB
L2 cache per core 1 MB/core 0.5 MB/core
Manufacture process 14 nm 65 nm
Max CPUs 1 1

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 2.14 GHz 2.11 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 1.6 GHz 1.6 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.14 GHz 2.11 GHz

integrated graphics

GPU GPU None
Label Intel® HD Graphics N/A
Number of displays supported 3 N/A
GPU clock speed 320 MHz N/A
Intel Celeron N3050
Report a correction
AMD Athlon 64 X2 42
Report a correction

Read more

Comments

comments powered by Disqus