Notebookcheck Logo
, , , , , ,
search relation.
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
 

Intel Atom N570 vs Intel Atom N475

Intel Atom N570

► remove from comparison Intel N570

The Intel Atom N570 is a dual core Atom CPU for small netbooks and offers relative slow performance but also features a low power consumption. Because of the "in order" execution, the Atom series CPUs are slower than Core / Celeron CPUs at the same clock rate. The N570 is produced in 45nm and supports DDR3 main memory. It contains the GMA3150 graphics card on the same chip.

Intel Atom N475

► remove from comparison Intel N475

The Intel Atom N475 is a small and cheap entry level CPU for Netbooks and small laptops. In the package is an integrated memory controller for DDR2 and DDR3 main memory (max 2 GB, single channel) and the GMA 3150 graphics card. Compared to the N455, the N475 is higher clocked and is specified for 6.5 Watt TDP instead of 5.5 Watt of the N455. The N470 offers only DDR2 support.

The performance of the whole system (Atom N475 and integrated GMA 3150) is only sufficient for basic tasks like surfing the web, or office working. HD video, video cutting, advanced photo editing and of course gaming may overstrain the GPU and CPU. Compared to the previous Atom generation, the performance gain is said to be only marginally above a similar clocked Atom Z / GMA 950.

An advantage of the interation, is the small overall power consumption of the CPU, GPU and memory controller (only 6.5 Watt TDP). Therefore, the chip is ideally used in small Netbooks, MIDs, and thin laptops.

ModelIntel Atom N570Intel Atom N475
SeriesIntel AtomIntel Atom
CodenamePineviewPineview
Series: Atom Pineview
» Intel Atom N5701.66 GHz2 / 4
Intel Atom N550 compare1.5 GHz2 / 4
Intel Atom N4751.86 GHz1 / 2
Intel Atom N470 compare1.86 GHz1 / 2
Intel Atom N5701.66 GHz2 / 4
Intel Atom N550 compare1.5 GHz2 / 4
» Intel Atom N4751.86 GHz1 / 2
Intel Atom N470 compare1.86 GHz1 / 2
Clock1660 MHz1860 MHz
FSB666533
L1 Cache112 KB
L2 Cache1 MB512 KB
Cores / Threads2 / 41 / 2
TDP8.5 Watt6.5 Watt
Transistors176 Million123 Million
Technology45 nm45 nm
Die Size87 mm266 mm2
Socket437FCBGA559
FeaturesIntegrated DDR3 Memory Controller, MMX, SSE (1,2,3,3S), EM64T, Enhanced Speedstep, HyperThreading, Execute Disable Bitintegrated DDR3 memory controller, integrated GMA 3150 GPU
Architecturex86x86
$86 U.S.$75 U.S.
Announced
ManufacturerIntel Atom N570Intel Atom N475
max. Temp.100 °C

Benchmarks

Cinebench R10 - Cinebench R10 Rend. Single (32bit)
100%
N570 +
min: 417     avg: 534     median: 565.5 (5%)     max: 589 Points
105%
N475 +
min: 582     avg: 595     median: 594.5 (5%)     max: 607 Points
Cinebench R10 - Cinebench R10 Rend. Multi (32bit)
100%
N570 +
min: 1361     avg: 1569     median: 1629.5 (2%)     max: 1654 Points
min: 940     avg: 949     median: 949 (1%)     max: 958 Points
wPrime 2.10 - wPrime 2.0 1024m *
100%
N570 +
1863 s (22%)
3308 s (39%)
wPrime 2.10 - wPrime 2.0 32m *
100%
N570 +
59 s (12%)
104.9 s (21%)
3DMark 06 - CPU - 3DMark 06 - CPU
100%
N570 +
min: 661     avg: 738     median: 738 (2%)     max: 815 Points
544 Points (1%)
Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 1M - Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 1M *
100%
N570 +
min: 88.8     avg: 98.9     median: 98.9 (21%)     max: 109 s
105%
N475 +
80 s (17%)
Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 2M - Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 2M *
100%
N570 +
238 s (10%)
103%
N475 +
176 s (8%)
Super Pi Mod 1.5 XS 32M - Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 32M *
100%
N570 +
3628 s (16%)
3958 s (18%)
SiSoft Sandra Dhrystone (MIPS) - SiSoft Sandra Dhrystone (MIPS)
100%
1 N570 +
8000 MIPS (4%)
Windows 7 Experience Index - Win7 CPU
100%
N570 +
min: 3.2     avg: 3.3     median: 3.3 (42%)     max: 3.4 Points
2.6 Points (33%)

Average Benchmarks Intel Atom N570 → 100% n=9

Average Benchmarks Intel Atom N475 → 88% n=9

- 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 22. 17:03:23

#0 checking url part for id 1593 +0s ... 0s

#1 checking url part for id 604 +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, 18 May 2022 13:12:25 +0200 +0s ... 0s

#4 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0.003s ... 0.004s

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

#6 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0.003s ... 0.008s

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

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

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

#10 composed specs +0s ... 0.008s

#11 did output specs +0s ... 0.008s

#12 getting avg benchmarks for device 1593 +0s ... 0.008s

#13 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0.001s ... 0.009s

#14 got single benchmarks 1593 +0.016s ... 0.024s

#15 getting avg benchmarks for device 604 +0s ... 0.025s

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

#17 got single benchmarks 604 +0.007s ... 0.032s

#18 got avg benchmarks for devices +0s ... 0.032s

#19 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.033s

#20 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0.001s ... 0.033s

#21 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.033s

#22 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.034s

#23 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.034s

#24 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.034s

#25 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.034s

#26 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.034s

#27 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.034s

#28 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.035s

#29 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.035s

#30 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.036s

#31 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.036s

#32 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.036s

#33 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.036s

#34 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.037s

#35 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.037s

#36 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.037s

#37 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.037s

#38 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0.001s ... 0.038s

#39 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.038s

#40 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.039s

#41 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.039s

#42 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.039s

#43 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.04s

#44 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.04s

#45 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.04s

#46 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.04s

#47 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.04s

#48 min, max, avg, median took s +0s ... 0.04s

#49 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0.03s ... 0.07s

#50 return log +0.004s ... 0.075s

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)