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 Core i3 330M

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core i3 330M

Report a correction
Much better geekbench 3 AES single core score 89,200 MB/s vs 48.3 MB/s More than 1846.8x better geekbench 3 AES single core score
Much newer manufacturing process 32 nm vs 65 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Much better geekbench 2 (32-bit) score 2,687 vs 962 More than 2.8x better geekbench 2 (32-bit) score
Significantly higher clock speed 2.13 GHz vs 1.2 GHz Around 80% higher clock speed
Has a built-in GPU Yes vs No Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required
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
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
Has virtualization support Yes vs No Somewhat common; Boosts performance of virtual machines
Significantly better overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.34 GHz vs 1.48 GHz Around 60% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
More threads 4 vs 1 3 more threads
Newer Jan, 2010 vs Oct, 2007 Release date over 2 years later
Better performance per watt 2.8 pt/W vs 1.24 pt/W More than 2.2x better performance per watt
More cores 2 vs 1 Twice as many cores; run more applications at once
Better PassMark score 1,793 vs 320 More than 5.5x better PassMark score
Significantly better overclocked clock speed (Water) 2.13 GHz vs 1.2 GHz Around 80% better overclocked clock speed (Water)
Front view of Intel Celeron 220

Reasons to consider the
Intel Celeron 220

Report a correction
Lower typical power consumption 15.44W vs 28.44W More than 45% lower typical power consumption
Lower annual home energy cost 4.58 $/year vs 8.43 $/year More than 45% lower annual home energy cost
Lower annual commercial energy cost 16.64 $/year vs 30.66 $/year More than 45% lower annual commercial energy cost

Benchmarks Real world tests of Core i3 330M vs Celeron 220

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 330M
89,200 MB/s
Celeron 220
48.3 MB/s

GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Core i3 330M  vs
Celeron 220 
Clock speed 2.13 GHz 1.2 GHz
Cores Dual core Single core
Socket type
BGA 1288
479

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Supports trusted computing No No
Has virtualization support Yes No
Instruction set extensions
SSE2
MMX
SSE4
SSE3
SSE
SSE4.1
SSE4.2
Supplemental SSE3
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes No

power consumption

TDP 35W 19W
Annual home energy cost 8.43 $/year 4.58 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 30.66 $/year 16.64 $/year
Performance per watt 2.8 pt/W 1.24 pt/W
Typical power consumption 28.44W 15.44W

details

Core i3 330M  vs
Celeron 220 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 4 1
L2 cache 1 MB 0.5 MB
L2 cache per core 0.5 MB/core 0.5 MB/core
Manufacture process 32 nm 65 nm
Transistor count 382,000,000 105,000,000
Max CPUs 1 1
Clock multiplier 16 12

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 2.34 GHz 1.48 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 2.13 GHz 1.2 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.34 GHz 1.48 GHz

integrated graphics

GPU GPU None
Label Intel® HD Graphics N/A
Number of displays supported 2 N/A
GPU clock speed 500 MHz N/A
Turbo clock speed 667 MHz N/A

bus

Architecture DMI FSB
Number of links 1 1
Intel Core i3 330M
Report a correction
Intel Celeron 220
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus