Celeron N2807 vs 3015Ce

VS

Aggregate performance score

3015Ce
2020
2 cores / 4 threads, 6 Watt
1.32
+326%
Celeron N2807
2014
2 cores / 2 threads, 4 Watt
0.31

3015Ce outperforms Celeron N2807 by a whopping 326% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing 3015Ce and Celeron N2807 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking22653108
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD Raven Ridge (Ryzen 2000 APU)Intel Celeron
Power efficiency20.827.33
Architecture codenamePollock (Zen) (2020)Bay Trail-M (2013−2014)
Release date4 August 2020 (4 years ago)23 February 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$107

Detailed specifications

3015Ce and Celeron N2807 basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.

Physical cores2 (Dual-core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads42
Base clock speed1.2 GHz1.58 GHz
Boost clock speed2.3 GHz2.16 GHz
L1 cache192 KB56K (per core)
L2 cache1 MB512K (per core)
L3 cache4 MB0 KB
Chip lithography14 nm22 nm
Maximum core temperature105 °C105 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibilityno data-

Compatibility

Information on 3015Ce and Celeron N2807 compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.

Number of CPUs in a configurationno data1
SocketFT5FCBGA1170
Power consumption (TDP)6 Watt4.3 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by 3015Ce and Celeron N2807. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsMMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, BMI2, ABM, FMA, ADX, SMEP, SMAP, SMT, CPB, AES-NI, RDRAND, RDSEED, SHA, SMEno data
AES-NI+-
FMA+-
AVX+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data+
Smart Connectno data+
RSTno data-

Security technologies

3015Ce and Celeron N2807 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

EDBno data+
Secure Keyno data+
Anti-Theftno data-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by 3015Ce and Celeron N2807 are enumerated here.

VT-dno data-
VT-xno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by 3015Ce and Celeron N2807. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4DDR3
Maximum memory sizeno data4 GB
Max memory channelsno data1

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon RX Vega 3 ( - 600 MHz)Intel HD Graphics for Intel Atom Processor Z3700 Series
Quick Sync Video-+
Graphics max frequencyno data750 MHz

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of 3015Ce and Celeron N2807 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data2

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by 3015Ce and Celeron N2807.

PCIe versionno data2.0
PCI Express lanesno data4
USB revisionno data3.0 and 2.0
Total number of SATA portsno data2
Number of USB portsno data5

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

3015Ce 1.32
+326%
Celeron N2807 0.31

Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

3015Ce 2099
+332%
Celeron N2807 486

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.32 0.31
Integrated graphics card 2.98 0.77
Recency 4 August 2020 23 February 2014
Threads 4 2
Chip lithography 14 nm 22 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 6 Watt 4 Watt

3015Ce has a 325.8% higher aggregate performance score, 287% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 6 years, 100% more threads, and a 57.1% more advanced lithography process.

Celeron N2807, on the other hand, has 50% lower power consumption.

The 3015Ce is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron N2807 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between 3015Ce and Celeron N2807, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


AMD 3015Ce
3015Ce
Intel Celeron N2807
Celeron N2807

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


3.2 19 votes

Rate 3015Ce on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.4 36 votes

Rate Celeron N2807 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about 3015Ce or Celeron N2807, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.