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 i7 3667U

CPUBoss Winner
 Front view of Intel Core i7 3667U
Front view of Intel Celeron U3405

Intel Celeron U3405

Join the discussion

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Core i7 3667U

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core i7 3667U

Report a correction
Significantly higher clock speed 2 GHz vs 1.06 GHz Around 90% higher clock speed
Much better turbo clock speed 1,150 MHz vs 500 MHz More than 2.2x better turbo clock speed
Much better performance per watt 25 pt/W vs 1.55 pt/W More than 16x better performance per watt
Significantly newer manufacturing process 22 nm vs 32 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Much better performance per dollar 1.23 pt/$ vs 0.26 pt/$ Around 4.8x better performance per dollar
Significantly higher GPU clock speed 350 MHz vs 166 MHz More than 2x higher GPU clock speed
Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.91 GHz vs 1.07 GHz Around 2.8x better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Supports trusted computing Yes vs No Somewhat common; Allows for safer, more reliable computing
Significantly more l3 cache per core 2 MB/core vs 1 MB/core 2x more l3 cache per core
More number of displays supported 3 vs 2 1 more number of displays supported
Slightly more l3 cache 4 MB vs 2 MB 2x more l3 cache; more data can be stored in the l3 cache for quick access later
Better PassMark score 3,953 vs 684 More than 5.8x better PassMark score
More threads 4 vs 2 Twice as many threads
Newer Jun, 2012 vs Aug, 2010 Release date over 1 years later
Significantly better overclocked clock speed (Water) 2 GHz vs 1.07 GHz More than 85% better overclocked clock speed (Water)
Front view of Intel Celeron U3405

Reasons to consider the
Intel Celeron U3405

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
More l2 cache per core 0.5 MB/core vs 0.25 MB/core 2x more l2 cache per core

Benchmarks Real world tests of Core i7 3667U vs Celeron U3405

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

Core i7 3667U
3,953
Celeron U3405
684

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

 Core i7 3667U  vs
Celeron U3405 
Clock speed 2 GHz 1.06 GHz
Cores Dual core Dual core
Socket type
BGA 1023
BGA 1288

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

power consumption
TDP 17W 18W
Annual home energy cost 4.1 $/year 4.34 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 14.89 $/year 15.77 $/year
Performance per watt 25 pt/W 1.55 pt/W
Typical power consumption 13.81W 14.63W

bus
Architecture DMI DMI
Number of links 1 1
Transfer rate 5,000 MT/s 2,500 MT/s

details

 Core i7 3667U  vs
Celeron U3405 
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
L3 cache 4 MB 2 MB
L3 cache per core 2 MB/core 1 MB/core
Manufacture process 22 nm 32 nm
Max CPUs 1 1
Clock multiplier 20 14

overclocking
Overclocked clock speed 2.91 GHz 1.07 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 2 GHz 1.07 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.91 GHz 1.07 GHz

integrated graphics
GPU GPU GPU
Label HD Graphics 4000 Intel® HD Graphics
Number of displays supported 3 2
GPU clock speed 350 MHz 166 MHz
Turbo clock speed 1,150 MHz 500 MHz

memory controller
Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Memory type
DDR3L-1600
DDR3-1066
DDR3L-1333
DDR3RS-1600
DDR3RS-1333
DDR3
DDR3-800
Channels Dual Channel Dual Channel
Supports ECC No Yes
Maximum bandwidth 25,600 MB/s 17,066.66 MB/s
Intel Core i7 3667U
Report a correction
Intel Celeron U3405
Report a correction

Read more

Comments

comments powered by Disqus

features

information

  • terms and privacy
  • about
  • blog

on the web

CPUBoss