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 Core i3 3217U

CPUBoss Winner
Front view of Intel Core i3 3217U

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Core i3 3217U

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core i3 3217U

Report a correction
Much better 3DMark06 CPU score 29.1 vs 16.7 Around 75% better 3DMark06 CPU score
Much better geekbench 2 (32-bit) score 2,887 vs 984 Around 3x better geekbench 2 (32-bit) score
Much better turbo clock speed 1,050 MHz vs 667 MHz More than 55% better turbo clock speed
Higher clock speed 1.8 GHz vs 1.46 GHz Around 25% higher clock speed
Significantly better geekbench 3 single core score 1,441 vs 601 Around 2.5x better geekbench 3 single core score
More number of displays supported 3 vs 2 1 more number of displays supported
Better performance per dollar 0.53 pt/$ vs 0.34 pt/$ Around 55% better performance per dollar
Better PassMark score 2,299 vs 453 More than 5x better PassMark score
More threads 4 vs 2 Twice as many threads
Slightly higher GPU clock speed 350 MHz vs 313 MHz More than 10% higher GPU clock speed
Better overclocked clock speed (Air) 1.8 GHz vs 1.46 GHz Around 25% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Better overclocked clock speed (Water) 1.8 GHz vs 1.46 GHz Around 25% better overclocked clock speed (Water)
Front view of Intel Celeron N2805

Reasons to consider the
Intel Celeron N2805

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
Lower typical power consumption 3.49W vs 13.81W 4x lower typical power consumption
More l2 cache per core 0.5 MB/core vs 0.25 MB/core 2x more l2 cache per core
Better performance per watt 8.49 pt/W vs 6.98 pt/W More than 20% better performance per watt
Newer Jul, 2013 vs Jun, 2012 Release date over a year later
Lower annual home energy cost 1.04 $/year vs 4.1 $/year 4x lower annual home energy cost
Lower annual commercial energy cost 3.77 $/year vs 14.89 $/year 4x lower annual commercial energy cost

Benchmarks Real world tests of Core i3 3217U vs Celeron N2805

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

Core i3 3217U
93,600 MB/s
Celeron N2805
34,400 MB/s

GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench

3D Mark 06 (CPU)

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Core i3 3217U  vs
Celeron N2805 
Clock speed 1.8 GHz 1.46 GHz
Cores Dual core Dual core

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE2
MMX
AVX
SSE3
EM64T
SSE
SSE4.1
SSE4.2
Supplemental SSE3
AES
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

power consumption

TDP 17W 4.3W
Annual home energy cost 4.1 $/year 1.04 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 14.89 $/year 3.77 $/year
Performance per watt 6.98 pt/W 8.49 pt/W
Typical power consumption 13.81W 3.49W

bus

Architecture DMI 2.0 FSB
Number of links 1 1

details

Core i3 3217U  vs
Celeron N2805 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 4 2
L2 cache 0.5 MB 1 MB
L2 cache per core 0.25 MB/core 0.5 MB/core
Manufacture process 22 nm 22 nm
Max CPUs 1 1

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 1.8 GHz 1.46 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 1.8 GHz 1.46 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 1.8 GHz 1.46 GHz

integrated graphics

GPU GPU GPU
Label Intel® HD Graphics 4000 Intel® HD Graphics
Number of displays supported 3 2
GPU clock speed 350 MHz 313 MHz
Turbo clock speed 1,050 MHz 667 MHz

memory controller

Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Memory type
DDR3-1600
DDR3L-1600
DDR3-1333
DDR3L-1333
DDR3RS-1600
DDR3RS-1333
DDR3
Channels Dual Channel Single Channel
Maximum bandwidth 25,600 MB/s 6,400 MB/s
Intel Core i3 3217U
Report a correction
Intel Celeron N2805
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus