Intel Core i5-6287U Processor's has 4 Threads. Una grande cache L1 risulta con una CPU più veloce e anche con un sistema con ottime prestazioni. The height represents the vertical dimension of the product. Il moltiplicatore di clok controlla la velocità della CPU. Intel Core i5-6287U Vs Intel Celeron Processor G4930T Intel Core i5-6287U Processor has 3.1GHz Clock Speed. Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. Due to the 100 MHz higher clock speed, the Celeron 5205U is slightly faster than the old Celeron 4205U but still behind the old Pentium 5405U (2.3 GHz, SMT). The bus is responsible for transferring data between different components of a computer or device. #0 checking url part for id 11526 +0s ... 0s, #1 checking url part for id 11459 +0s ... 0s, #2 redirected to Ajax server, took 0 +0s ... 0s, #3 did not recreate cache, as it is less than 5 days old! Compared to the faster i5-10510U, the level 3 cache was reduced from 8 to 6 MB. This benchmark measures the performance of the CPU using a single thread. La tecnologia multithreading (come l'Hyperthreading di Intel o il Multithreading simultaneo di AMD) fornisce maggiori prestazioni dividendo ciascuno dei core fisici del processore in core virtuali, noti anche come thread. Furthermore, the SoC integrates a VP9 and H.265 de- and encoder and an integrated dual channel DDR4-2666 / LPDDR4x 2933 / LPDDR3-2133 memory controller. It also allows you to run 64-bit apps. Celeron N2840. GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), 7th Generation Intel® Core™ i5 Processors, DDR4-1866/2133, LPDDR3-1600/1866, DDR3L-1333/1600, Intel® Memory Protection Extensions (Intel® MPX), Intel® Software Guard Extensions (Intel® SGX), Intel® Trusted Execution technology (TXT), Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2, Intel® Stable Image Platform Program (SIPP), Intel® Virtualization Technology for Directed I/O (VT-d), Intel® VT-x with Extended Page Tables (EPT), /  Intel Celeron 3855U vs Intel Core i5-7300U, Around 27% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1618 vs 1273, Around 19% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 2907 vs 2450, Around 27% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1618 vs 1273, Around 19% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 2907 vs 2450, 2.2x better performance in PassMark - Single thread mark: 1986 vs 917, 3.1x better performance in PassMark - CPU mark: 3719 vs 1199, Around 77% better performance in Geekbench 4 - Single Core: 676 vs 381, Around 80% better performance in Geekbench 4 - Multi-Core: 1319 vs 731, Around 83% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1492 vs 814, Around 83% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1492 vs 814. Il bus è responsabile per il trasferimento di dati tra i diversi componenti di un computer o dispositivo. Celeron E3300 vs Core i5-760 memory performance Memory-intensive tests or programs move large amounts of data to/from memory, and they depend more on memory throughput and the size of on-chip caches, rather than on CPU integer/FP/SIMD performance. Più canali memoria aumentano la velocità di trasferimento dati tra la memoria e la CPU. These scores are only an. iGPU - FP32 Performance (Single-precision GFLOPS), Intel Celeron N4100 vs Intel Celeron J4115, Intel Core i5-7500 vs Intel Core i5-7500T, Intel Core i5-7500T vs Intel Core i7-7700T, Intel Core i3-7100T vs Intel Core i5-7500T, Intel Core i5-6500T vs Intel Core i5-7500T, Intel Celeron J4125 vs Intel Celeron J4115, Intel Core i5-7500T vs Intel Core i7-7500U, Intel Celeron J4105 vs Intel Celeron J4115, Intel Core i5-7400T vs Intel Core i5-7500T, Intel Core i3-7100 vs Intel Core i5-7500T, Intel Core i5-7500T vs Intel Core i5-4590, Intel Core i5-7500T vs Intel Core i7-7700, Intel Core i3-7320 vs Intel Core i5-7500T, Intel Core i5-7500T vs Intel Core i5-3570K, Intel Core i5-7500T vs Intel Core i5-8250U, Intel Celeron J4115 vs Intel Celeron J3455, Intel Core i5-8500T vs Intel Core i5-7500T, Intel Core i5-7500T vs Intel Pentium G4620, Intel Core i5-5257U vs Intel Celeron J4115, Intel Celeron N3450 vs Intel Celeron J4115, Intel Core i5-7600T vs Intel Core i5-7500T, Intel Core i7-7567U vs Intel Core i5-7500T, Intel Core i5-7500T vs Intel Pentium G4600T, Intel Celeron J4115 vs Intel Celeron N4000, Intel Celeron J4115 vs Intel Core i5-7500T. Altre threads traducono i risultati in prestazioni più veloci e un miglior multitasking. Intel Celeron 3855U vs Intel Core i5-7300U. Alcune applicazioni utilizzano OpenCL per utilizzare la potenza dell'unità di elaborazione grafica (GPU) non per l`elaborazione grafica. When the CPU is running below its limitations, it can boost to a higher clock speed in order to give increased performance. More information on Comet Lake and all the models and articles on it can be found here. Il benchmark misura le prestazioni della CPU utilizzando un singolo thread. Grazie ad una scheda grafica integrata non è necessario acquistare una scheda grafica separata. ... (DDR4-2666 vs 2400) and two additional cores in the top model (not in this i5). The chip is still produced in the 14nm++ process as Whiskey Lake. AskGeek.io - Compare processors and videocards to choose the best. This benchmark measures the performance of the CPU using multiple threads. Intel Celeron 5205U vs Intel Core i5-10210U. This page contains references to products from one or more of our advertisers. DirectX è utilizzato nei giochi, le nuove versioni supportano una grafica migliore. When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Consideriamo migliore un'altezza minore perché consente una facile manovrabilità. More threads result in faster performance and better multitasking. Intel Celeron N3350. We consider a smaller width better because it assures easy maneuverability. The graphics processing unit (GPU) has a higher clock speed. Le versioni più recenti hanno introdotto maggiori funzionalità e prestazioni migliori. These links are indicated using the hashtag #ad. Created at Sun, 25 Oct 2020 12:05:31 +0100 +0.001s ... 0.001s, #6 getting avg benchmarks for device 11526 +0s ... 0.014s, #7 got single benchmarks 11526 +0s ... 0.014s, #8 getting avg benchmarks for device 11459 +0s ... 0.014s, #9 got single benchmarks 11459 +0.062s ... 0.076s, #10 got avg benchmarks for devices +0s ... 0.076s, #11 skipping 671/2015 for average % as not all devices got results +0.026s ... 0.102s, #12 skipping 671/2014 for average % as not all devices got results +0s ... 0.102s, #13 skipping 244/706 for average % as not all devices got results +0s ... 0.102s, #14 skipping 244/705 for average % as not all devices got results +0s ... 0.102s, #15 skipping 62/250 for average % as not all devices got results +0s ... 0.102s, #16 skipping 62/491 for average % as not all devices got results +0s ... 0.102s, #17 skipping 22/36 for average % as not all devices got results +0s ... 0.102s, #18 skipping 22/37 for average % as not all devices got results +0s ... 0.102s, #19 skipping 50/204 for average % as not all devices got results +0s ... 0.102s, #20 skipping 50/203 for average % as not all devices got results +0s ... 0.102s, #21 skipping 80/325 for average % as not all devices got results +0s ... 0.102s, #22 skipping 80/324 for average % as not all devices got results +0s ... 0.102s, #23 skipping 91/360 for average % as not all devices got results +0s ... 0.102s, #24 skipping 552/1606 for average % as not all devices got results +0s ... 0.102s, #25 skipping 552/1608 for average % as not all devices got results +0s ... 0.102s, #26 skipping 92/362 for average % as not all devices got results +0s ... 0.102s, #27 skipping 92/361 for average % as not all devices got results +0s ... 0.102s, #28 skipping 560/1628 for average % as not all devices got results +0s ... 0.102s, #29 skipping 93/365 for average % as not all devices got results +0s ... 0.102s, #30 skipping 93/364 for average % as not all devices got results +0s ... 0.102s, #31 skipping 93/363 for average % as not all devices got results +0s ... 0.102s, #32 skipping 496/1438 for average % as not all devices got results +0s ... 0.102s, #33 skipping 716/2169 for average % as not all devices got results +0s ... 0.102s, #34 skipping 5/2245 for average % as not all devices got results +0s ... 0.102s, #35 skipping 6/2242 for average % as not all devices got results +0s ... 0.102s, #36 skipping 7/2243 for average % as not all devices got results +0s ... 0.102s, #37 skipping 8/2244 for average % as not all devices got results +0s ... 0.102s, #38 skipping 73/296 for average % as not all devices got results +0s ... 0.102s, #39 skipping 201/602 for average % as not all devices got results +0s ... 0.102s, #40 skipping 201/648 for average % as not all devices got results +0s ... 0.102s, #41 skipping 201/715 for average % as not all devices got results +0s ... 0.102s, #42 skipping 201/605 for average % as not all devices got results +0s ... 0.102s, #43 skipping 201/608 for average % as not all devices got results +0s ... 0.102s, #44 skipping 201/1068 for average % as not all devices got results +0s ... 0.102s, #45 skipping 235/683 for average % as not all devices got results +0s ... 0.102s, #46 skipping 235/682 for average % as not all devices got results +0s ... 0.102s, #47 skipping 235/852 for average % as not all devices got results +0s ... 0.102s, #48 skipping 235/851 for average % as not all devices got results +0s ... 0.102s, #49 skipping 393/1073 for average % as not all devices got results +0s ... 0.102s, #50 skipping 393/1072 for average % as not all devices got results +0s ... 0.102s, #51 skipping 440/1260 for average % as not all devices got results +0s ... 0.102s, #52 skipping 440/1262 for average % as not all devices got results +0s ... 0.102s, #53 skipping 693/2089 for average % as not all devices got results +0s ... 0.102s, #54 skipping 693/2090 for average % as not all devices got results +0s ... 0.102s, #55 skipping 717/2170 for average % as not all devices got results +0s ... 0.102s, #56 skipping 717/2171 for average % as not all devices got results +0s ... 0.102s, #57 skipping 241/699 for average % as not all devices got results +0s ... 0.102s, #58 skipping 253/728 for average % as not all devices got results +0s ... 0.102s, #59 min, max, avg, median took s +0s ... 0.102s. Questo è il livello massimo al quale i dati possono essere letti o memorizzati nella memoria. AES è usato per accelerare la crittografia e la decrittografia. 64-bit permette più di 4GB, dando maggiori prestazioni.