Celeron 560 vs Atom N2800

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Atom N2800
2011
2 cores / 4 threads, 6 Watt
0.28
+33.3%

Atom N2800 outperforms Celeron 560 by a substantial 33% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Atom N2800 and Celeron 560 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking31333211
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel Atomno data
Power efficiency3.780.64
Architecture codenameCedarview-M (2011−2012)no data
Release date1 December 2011 (13 years ago)1 January 2008 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$47no data

Detailed specifications

Atom N2800 and Celeron 560 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)no data
Threads4no data
Base clock speed1.86 GHz2.13 GHz
Boost clock speed1.87 GHzno data
L1 cache64 KB (per core)no data
L2 cache512K (per core)no data
L3 cache0 KB1 MB L2 Cache
Chip lithography32 nm65 nm
Die size66 mm2no data
Maximum core temperatureno data100 °C
Number of transistors176 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage rangeno data0.95V-1.3V

Compatibility

Information on Atom N2800 and Celeron 560 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 configuration1no data
SocketFCBGA559PPGA478
Power consumption (TDP)6.5 Watt31 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Atom N2800 and Celeron 560. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE2, Intel® SSE3, Intel® SSSE3no data
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+-
Turbo Boost Technology--
Hyper-Threading Technology+-
Idle Statesno data-
Thermal Monitoring+-
Demand Based Switching--
FSB parityno data-

Security technologies

Atom N2800 and Celeron 560 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT--
EDB++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Atom N2800 and Celeron 560 are enumerated here.

VT-d-no data
VT-x--

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Atom N2800 and Celeron 560. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3no data
Maximum memory size4.88 GBno data
Max memory channels1no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 3650 (640 MHz)no data

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.

Atom N2800 0.28
+33.3%
Celeron 560 0.21

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.

Atom N2800 444
+31%
Celeron 560 339

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.28 0.21
Recency 1 December 2011 1 January 2008
Chip lithography 32 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 6 Watt 31 Watt

Atom N2800 has a 33.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 103.1% more advanced lithography process, and 416.7% lower power consumption.

The Atom N2800 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron 560 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Atom N2800 and Celeron 560, 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.


Intel Atom N2800
Atom N2800
Intel Celeron 560
Celeron 560

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.


2.7 104 votes

Rate Atom N2800 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 15 votes

Rate Celeron 560 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Atom N2800 or Celeron 560, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.