That's actually even worse. The integrated graphics processor is somewhat better than the Intel HD graphics, but the CPU is still slower than the 1017U. Even though the 1017U is an ULV CPU, it's an Ivy Bridge CPU, which will beat any of AMD's CPUs at the same or similar clock speeds when it comes to Dolphin. We've done benchmarks and that's the result we keep finding. For Dolphin, AMD's current CPUs simply have lower single-threaded IPC than Intel's, and that makes all the difference.
EDIT: Dolphin is a dual-core program, largely, so don't expect the quad-core AMD APU to give it a major advantage over the Celeron (which is just dual-core). Quad-cores do allow Dolphin to run better since other tasks in the background (OS stuff, other active programs) can run, but the Ivy Bridge architecture has the advantage over the APU when strictly talking about Dolphin. PC gaming is a different ballpark, but in Dolphin, the latest generations of Intel products beat AMD's comparable offerings (talking about the CPU itself, not the integrated graphics, though Intel is making strides there as).
EDIT: Dolphin is a dual-core program, largely, so don't expect the quad-core AMD APU to give it a major advantage over the Celeron (which is just dual-core). Quad-cores do allow Dolphin to run better since other tasks in the background (OS stuff, other active programs) can run, but the Ivy Bridge architecture has the advantage over the APU when strictly talking about Dolphin. PC gaming is a different ballpark, but in Dolphin, the latest generations of Intel products beat AMD's comparable offerings (talking about the CPU itself, not the integrated graphics, though Intel is making strides there as).