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 T3100

CPUBoss Winner
Front view of Intel Celeron T3100

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Celeron T3100

Reasons to consider the
Intel Celeron T3100

Report a correction
Significantly higher clock speed 1.9 GHz vs 1 GHz Around 90% higher clock speed
Significantly more l2 cache 1 MB vs 0.25 MB 4x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Much better performance per dollar 1.29 pt/$ vs 0.29 pt/$ Around 4.5x better performance per dollar
Significantly better overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.05 GHz vs 1 GHz More than 2x better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Better PassMark (Single core) score 770 vs 407 Around 90% better PassMark (Single core) score
More l2 cache per core 0.5 MB/core vs 0.25 MB/core 2x more l2 cache per core
More cores 2 vs 1 Twice as many cores; run more applications at once
Higher Maximum operating temperature 105 °C vs 100 °C 5% higher Maximum operating temperature
Significantly better overclocked clock speed (Water) 1.9 GHz vs 1 GHz Around 90% better overclocked clock speed (Water)
Front view of Intel Celeron 807UE

Reasons to consider the
Intel Celeron 807UE

Report a correction
Has a built-in GPU Yes vs No Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required
Much newer manufacturing process 32 nm vs 45 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 virtualization support Yes vs No Somewhat common; Boosts performance of virtual machines
Significantly lower typical power consumption 8.13W vs 28.44W 3.5x lower typical power consumption
Newer Oct, 2011 vs Jun, 2009 Release date over 2 years later
Better performance per watt 3.04 pt/W vs 2.28 pt/W Around 35% better performance per watt
Significantly lower annual home energy cost 2.41 $/year vs 8.43 $/year 3.5x lower annual home energy cost
Significantly lower annual commercial energy cost 8.76 $/year vs 30.66 $/year 3.5x lower annual commercial energy cost

Benchmarks Real world tests of Celeron T3100 vs 807UE

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Celeron T3100  vs
807UE 
Clock speed 1.9 GHz 1 GHz
Cores Dual core Single core
Socket type
479
P
BGA 1023

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Supports trusted computing No No
Has virtualization support No Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE2
MMX
SSE3
SSE
SSE4.1
Supplemental SSE3
Supports dynamic frequency scaling No Yes

power consumption

TDP 35W 10W
Annual home energy cost 8.43 $/year 2.41 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 30.66 $/year 8.76 $/year
Performance per watt 2.28 pt/W 3.04 pt/W
Typical power consumption 28.44W 8.13W

details

Celeron T3100  vs
807UE 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 2 1
L2 cache 1 MB 0.25 MB
L2 cache per core 0.5 MB/core 0.25 MB/core
Manufacture process 45 nm 32 nm
Max CPUs 1 1
Operating temperature Unknown - 105°C Unknown - 100°C

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 2.05 GHz 1 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 1.9 GHz 1 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.05 GHz 1 GHz

integrated graphics

GPU None GPU
Label N/A Intel® HD Graphics
GPU clock speed N/A 350 MHz
Turbo clock speed N/A 800 MHz

bus

Architecture FSB DMI
Number of links 1 1
Intel Celeron T3100
Report a correction
Intel Celeron 807UE
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus