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 AMD Athlon II X4 635

AMD Athlon II X4 635

CPUBoss Winner

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Celeron N3050

Reasons to consider the
Intel Celeron N3050

Report a correction
Much newer manufacturing process 14 nm vs 45 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Much lower typical power consumption 4.88W vs 137.63W 28.2x lower typical power consumption
Has a built-in GPU Yes vs No Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required
Much better performance per watt 8.65 pt/W vs 0.79 pt/W Around 11x better performance per watt
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 1.45 $/year vs 48.4 $/year 33.5x lower annual home energy cost
Much lower annual commercial energy cost 5.26 $/year vs 137.53 $/year 26.2x lower annual commercial energy cost
Newer Jan, 2015 vs Jan, 2010 Release date over 5 years later
Front view of AMD Athlon II X4 635

Reasons to consider the
AMD Athlon II X4 635

Report a correction
Much higher clock speed 2.9 GHz vs 1.6 GHz More than 80% higher clock speed
Much better geekbench 3 Multi-Core score 5,202 vs 1,584 More than 3.2x better geekbench 3 Multi-Core score
Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.58 GHz vs 2.14 GHz More than 65% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Better geekbench 3 single core score 1,502 vs 879 More than 70% better geekbench 3 single core score
More cores 4 vs 2 Twice as many cores; run more applications at once
More threads 4 vs 2 Twice as many threads
Significantly better overclocked clock speed (Water) 2.9 GHz vs 1.6 GHz More than 80% better overclocked clock speed (Water)

Benchmarks Real world tests of Celeron N3050 vs Athlon II X4 635

GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Celeron N3050
350.4 MB/s
Athlon II X4 635
116,950 MB/s

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Celeron N3050  vs
Athlon II X4 635 
Clock speed 1.6 GHz 2.9 GHz
Cores Dual core Quad core

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE4a
SSE2
MMX
SSE3
SSE
3DNow!
AES
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

power consumption

TDP 6W 95W
Annual home energy cost 1.45 $/year 48.4 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 5.26 $/year 137.53 $/year
Performance per watt 8.65 pt/W 0.79 pt/W
Typical power consumption 4.88W 137.63W

details

Celeron N3050  vs
Athlon II X4 635 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 2 4
L2 cache 2 MB 2 MB
L2 cache per core 1 MB/core 0.5 MB/core
Manufacture process 14 nm 45 nm
Max CPUs 1 1

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 2.14 GHz 3.58 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 1.6 GHz 2.9 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.14 GHz 3.58 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 II X4 635
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus