Notebookcheck Logo

Intel Pentium 957 vs Intel Pentium B950

Intel Pentium 957

► remove from comparison

The Intel Pentium 957 is an Ultra Low Voltage (ULV) dual core processor for entry-level laptops. It is based on the Sandy Bridge architecture but many of the features like Turbo Boost, Virtualization (VT-x, VT-d), HyperThreading, AES or Trusted Execution are deactivated. The Pentium 957 integrates a graphics card called Intel HD Graphics that is based on the HD Graphics 2000 and clocked from 350 - 800 MHz.

The performance of the Pentium 957 should be faster than a similar clocked Arrandale Pentium CPU and therefore on a level of the 1.3 GHz Pentium U5600.

The 17W TDP rating includes the integrated GPU and memory controller and therefore the 957 is suited for small subnotebooks.

Intel Pentium B950

► remove from comparison

The Intel Pentium B950 is a dual core processor for entry-level laptops. It is based on the Sandy Bridge architecture but many of the features like Turbo Boost for the CPU part, HyperThreading, AES, Virtualization (VT-x and VT-d), Trusted Execution or Intel Quick Sync are deactivated. The Pentium B940 integrates a graphics card called Intel HD Graphics that is based on the HD Graphics 2000 clocked at 650 / 1100 (with Turbo Boost).

The performance of the Pentium B950 should be faster than a similar clocked Arrandale Pentium CPU like the Intel Pentium P6200 due to the architectural changes in the core.

The 35W TDP rating includes the integrated GPU and memory controller.

ModelIntel Pentium 957Intel Pentium B950
SeriesIntel PentiumIntel Pentium
CodenameSandy BridgeSandy Bridge
Series: Pentium Sandy Bridge
Intel Pentium B980 compare2.4 GHz2 / 22 MB
Intel Pentium B970 compare2.3 GHz2 / 22 MB
Intel Pentium B960 compare2.2 GHz2 / 22 MB
Intel Pentium B9502.1 GHz2 / 22 MB
Intel Pentium B940 compare2 GHz2 / 22 MB
Intel Pentium 997 compare1.6 GHz2 / 22 MB
Intel Pentium 987 compare1.5 GHz2 / 22 MB
Intel Pentium 977 compare1.4 GHz2 / 22 MB
Intel Pentium 967 compare1.3 GHz2 / 22 MB
» Intel Pentium 9571.2 GHz2 / 22 MB
Intel Pentium B980 compare2.4 GHz2 / 22 MB
Intel Pentium B970 compare2.3 GHz2 / 22 MB
Intel Pentium B960 compare2.2 GHz2 / 22 MB
» Intel Pentium B9502.1 GHz2 / 22 MB
Intel Pentium B940 compare2 GHz2 / 22 MB
Intel Pentium 997 compare1.6 GHz2 / 22 MB
Intel Pentium 987 compare1.5 GHz2 / 22 MB
Intel Pentium 977 compare1.4 GHz2 / 22 MB
Intel Pentium 967 compare1.3 GHz2 / 22 MB
Intel Pentium 9571.2 GHz2 / 22 MB
Clock1200 MHz2100 MHz
L1 Cache128 KB128 KB
L2 Cache512 KB512 KB
L3 Cache2 MB2 MB
Cores / Threads2 / 22 / 2
TDP17 Watt35 Watt
Technology32 nm32 nm
max. Temp.100 °C85 °C
SocketBGA1023rPGA988B
FeaturesHD Graphics, DDR3 Memory Controller, Enhanced Speedstep, Thermal Monitoring, Execute Disable BitHD Graphics, DDR3 Memory Controller
iGPUIntel HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) (350 - 800 MHz)Intel HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) (650 - 1100 MHz)
Architecturex86x86
Announced
ManufacturerIntel Pentium 957Intel Pentium B950
Transistors624 Million
Die Size149 mm2

Benchmarks

Cinebench R11.5 - Cinebench R11.5 CPU Multi 64 Bit
100%
1 B950 +
1.6 Points (3%)
Cinebench R10 - Cinebench R10 Rend. Single (32bit)
100%
1 B950 +
min: 2694     avg: 2720     median: 2730 (24%)     max: 2735 Points
Cinebench R10 - Cinebench R10 Rend. Multi (32bit)
100%
1 B950 +
min: 5187     avg: 5247     median: 5255 (7%)     max: 5300 Points
Cinebench R10 - Cinebench R10 Rend. Multi (64bit)
100%
1 B950 +
min: 6459     avg: 6506     median: 6505.5 (6%)     max: 6552 Points
Cinebench R10 - Cinebench R10 Rend. Single (64bit)
100%
1 B950 +
min: 3327     avg: 3364     median: 3364 (21%)     max: 3401 Points
wPrime 2.10 - wPrime 2.0 1024m *
100%
1 B950 +
min: 1072     avg: 1100     median: 1078 (13%)     max: 1149 s
wPrime 2.10 - wPrime 2.0 32m *
100%
1 B950 +
min: 33.7     avg: 34.8     median: 34.3 (7%)     max: 36.52 s
WinRAR - WinRAR 4.0
100%
1 B950 +
1333 Points (8%)
X264 HD Benchmark 4.0 - x264 Pass 2
100%
1 B950 +
8.9 fps (4%)
X264 HD Benchmark 4.0 - x264 Pass 1
100%
1 B950 +
50 fps (14%)
TrueCrypt - TrueCrypt Serpent
100%
1 B950 +
0.1 GB/s (2%)
TrueCrypt - TrueCrypt Twofish
100%
1 B950 +
0.1 GB/s (3%)
TrueCrypt - TrueCrypt AES
100%
1 B950 +
0.2 GB/s (1%)
3DMark 06 - CPU - 3DMark 06 - CPU
100%
1 B950 +
min: 2109     avg: 2133     median: 2145 (5%)     max: 2146 Points
Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 1M - Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 1M *
100%
1 B950 +
min: 18.81     avg: 19     median: 18.9 (4%)     max: 19.14 s
Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 2M - Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 2M *
100%
1 B950 +
min: 42.12     avg: 42.7     median: 42.6 (2%)     max: 43.17 s
Super Pi Mod 1.5 XS 32M - Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 32M *
100%
1 B950 +
min: 956     avg: 969     median: 968.5 (4%)     max: 981 s
SiSoft Sandra Dhrystone (MIPS) - SiSoft Sandra Dhrystone (MIPS)
100%
1 B950 +
25560 MIPS (12%)
SiSoft Sandra Whetstone (MFLOPS) - SiSoft Sandra Whetstone (MFLOPS)
100%
1 B950 +
15000 MFLOPS (12%)
Windows 7 Experience Index - Win7 CPU
100%
1 B950 +
5.9 Points (76%)
3DMark Vantage - 3DM Vant. Perf. CPU no Physx
100%
1 B950 +
min: 4957     avg: 5084     median: 5083.5 (5%)     max: 5210 Points
3DMark - 3DMark Ice Storm Physics
100%
1 B950 +
15557 Points (10%)
3DMark - 3DMark Cloud Gate Physics
100%
1 B950 +
1379 Points (3%)
Geekbench 2 - 32 Bit - Geekbench Stream
100%
1 B950 +
5976 Points (48%)
Geekbench 2 - 32 Bit - Geekbench Memory
100%
1 B950 +
4938 Points (45%)
Geekbench 2 - 32 Bit - Geekbench Floating Point
100%
1 B950 +
3490 Points (7%)
Geekbench 2 - 32 Bit - Geekbench Integer
100%
1 B950 +
3187 Points (6%)
Geekbench 2 - 32 Bit - Geekbench Total Score
100%
1 B950 +
3922 Points (10%)

Average Benchmarks Intel Pentium B950 → NAN% n=

- Range of benchmark values for this graphics card
- Average benchmark values for this graphics card
* Smaller numbers mean a higher performance
1 This benchmark is not used for the average calculation

Add one or more devices and compare

In the following list you can select (and also search for) devices that should be added to the comparison. You can select more than one device.

restrict list:

show all (including archived), 2022, 2021
v1.17
log 25. 06:58:47

#0 checking url part for id 2728 +0s ... 0s

#1 checking url part for id 2368 +0s ... 0s

#2 not redirecting to Ajax server +0s ... 0s

#3 did not recreate cache, as it is less than 5 days old! Created at Wed, 22 Jun 2022 13:12:54 +0200 +0s ... 0s

#4 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0.003s ... 0.003s

#5 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0.001s ... 0.005s

#6 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0.002s ... 0.007s

#7 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.007s

#8 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.007s

#9 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.007s

#10 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.007s

#11 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.007s

#12 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.007s

#13 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.007s

#14 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.007s

#15 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.007s

#16 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.007s

#17 composed specs +0s ... 0.007s

#18 did output specs +0s ... 0.007s

#19 getting avg benchmarks for device 2728 +0s ... 0.007s

#20 got single benchmarks 2728 +0s ... 0.007s

#21 getting avg benchmarks for device 2368 +0s ... 0.007s

#22 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.008s

#23 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0.001s ... 0.008s

#24 got single benchmarks 2368 +0.01s ... 0.019s

#25 got avg benchmarks for devices +0s ... 0.019s

#26 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.019s

#27 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0.001s ... 0.02s

#28 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.02s

#29 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.02s

#30 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.02s

#31 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.02s

#32 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.02s

#33 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.02s

#34 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.02s

#35 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.021s

#36 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.021s

#37 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.021s

#38 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.021s

#39 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.021s

#40 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.021s

#41 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.021s

#42 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.021s

#43 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.022s

#44 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.022s

#45 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.022s

#46 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.022s

#47 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.023s

#48 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.023s

#49 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.023s

#50 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.023s

#51 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.023s

#52 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.024s

#53 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.024s

#54 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.024s

#55 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.024s

#56 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.024s

#57 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.025s

#58 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.025s

#59 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.025s

#60 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.025s

#61 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.025s

#62 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.025s

#63 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.026s

#64 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.026s

#65 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.026s

#66 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.026s

#67 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.027s

#68 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.027s

#69 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.027s

#70 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.028s

#71 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.028s

#72 min, max, avg, median took s +0s ... 0.028s

#73 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0.026s ... 0.054s

#74 return log +0.004s ... 0.058s

Please share our article, every link counts!
> Notebook / Laptop Reviews and News > Benchmarks / Tech > Processor Comparison - Head 2 Head
Redaktion, 2017-09- 8 (Update: 2017-09-11)