Celeron N2920 vs Atom x7-E3950

Aggregate performance score

Atom x7-E3950
2014
4 cores / 4 threads, 12 Watt
1.21
+98.4%

Atom x7-E3950 outperforms Celeron N2920 by an impressive 98% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Atom x7-E3950 and Celeron N2920 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking22512680
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Series7x Intel AtomIntel Celeron
Architecture codenameApollo Lake (2016)Bay Trail-M (2013−2014)
Release date30 August 2014 (9 years ago)1 December 2013 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$57$107
Current price$377 (6.6x MSRP)$278 (2.6x MSRP)

Detailed specifications

Atom x7-E3950 and Celeron N2920 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads44
Base clock speed1.6 GHz1.86 GHz
Boost clock speed2 GHz2 GHz
L1 cache56K (per core)56K (per core)
L2 cache2 MB (shared)512K (per core)
L3 cache0 KB0 KB
Chip lithography14 nm22 nm
Maximum core temperature110 °C105 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)103 °Cno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplierNoNo

Compatibility

Information on Atom x7-E3950 and Celeron N2920 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 configuration1 (Uniprocessor)1
SocketIntel BGA 1296FCBGA1170
Power consumption (TDP)12 Watt7.5 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Atom x7-E3950 and Celeron N2920. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data+
Smart Connectno data+
Statusno dataDiscontinued
RSTno data-

Security technologies

Atom x7-E3950 and Celeron N2920 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+no data
EDBno data+
Identity Protectionno data-
Anti-Theftno data-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Atom x7-E3950 and Celeron N2920 are enumerated here.

VT-d+-
VT-x++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Atom x7-E3950 and Celeron N2920. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3, DDR4DDR3
Maximum memory size8 GB8 GB
Max memory channelsno data2

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel HD Graphics 505Intel® HD Graphics for Intel Atom® Processor Z3700 Series
Graphics max frequencyno data844 MHz

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Atom x7-E3950 and Celeron N2920 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data2

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Atom x7-E3950 and Celeron N2920.

PCIe version2.02.0
PCI Express lanes44
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.

Atom x7-E3950 1.21
+98.4%
Celeron N2920 0.61

Atom x7-E3950 outperforms Celeron N2920 by 98% based on our aggregate benchmark results.


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.

Benchmark coverage: 68%

Atom x7-E3950 1864
+96.2%
Celeron N2920 950

Atom x7-E3950 outperforms Celeron N2920 by 96% in Passmark.

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

Benchmark coverage: 20%

Atom x7-E3950 1304
+26.6%
Celeron N2920 1030

Atom x7-E3950 outperforms Celeron N2920 by 27% in Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core.

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

Atom x7-E3950 3769
+6.8%
Celeron N2920 3530

Atom x7-E3950 outperforms Celeron N2920 by 7% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.

3DMark06 CPU

3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

Atom x7-E3950 2152
+15.7%
Celeron N2920 1861

Atom x7-E3950 outperforms Celeron N2920 by 16% in 3DMark06 CPU.

wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

Benchmark coverage: 18%

Atom x7-E3950 30.26
+5.7%
Celeron N2920 31.99

Celeron N2920 outperforms Atom x7-E3950 by 6% in wPrime 32.

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

Atom x7-E3950 2
+12.6%
Celeron N2920 1

Atom x7-E3950 outperforms Celeron N2920 by 13% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core.

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.

Benchmark coverage: 15%

Atom x7-E3950 125
+5.5%
Celeron N2920 119

Atom x7-E3950 outperforms Celeron N2920 by 5% in Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core.

Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R15 (standing for Release 15) is a benchmark made by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version (sometimes called Single-Thread) only uses a single processor thread to render a room full of reflective spheres and light sources.

Benchmark coverage: 15%

Atom x7-E3950 41
+26.2%
Celeron N2920 33

Atom x7-E3950 outperforms Celeron N2920 by 26% in Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core.

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R11.5 is an old benchmark by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version loads a single thread with ray tracing to render a glossy room full of crystal spheres and light sources.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

Atom x7-E3950 0.51
+34.2%
Celeron N2920 0.38

Atom x7-E3950 outperforms Celeron N2920 by 34% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core.

TrueCrypt AES

TrueCrypt is a discontinued piece of software that was widely used for on-the-fly-encryption of disk partitions, now superseded by VeraCrypt. It contains several embedded performance tests, one of them being TrueCrypt AES, which measures data encryption speed using AES algorithm. Result is encryption speed in gigabytes per second.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

Atom x7-E3950 1
+376%
Celeron N2920 0.2

Atom x7-E3950 outperforms Celeron N2920 by 376% in TrueCrypt AES.

WinRAR 4.0

WinRAR 4.0 is an outdated version of a popular file archiver. It contains an internal speed test, using 'Best' setting of RAR compression on large chunks of randomly generated data. Its results are measured in kilobytes per second.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

Atom x7-E3950 725
Celeron N2920 1728
+138%

Celeron N2920 outperforms Atom x7-E3950 by 138% in WinRAR 4.0.

x264 encoding pass 2

x264 Pass 2 is a slower variant of x264 video compression that produces a variable bit rate output file, which results in better quality since the higher bit rate is used when it is needed more. Benchmark result is still measured in frames per second.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

Atom x7-E3950 9
+10%
Celeron N2920 8

Atom x7-E3950 outperforms Celeron N2920 by 10% in x264 encoding pass 2.

x264 encoding pass 1

x264 version 4.0 is a video encoding benchmark uses MPEG 4 x264 compression method to compress a sample HD (720p) video. Pass 1 is a faster variant that produces a constant bit rate output file. Its result is measured in frames per second, which means how many frames of the source video file were encoded per second.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

Atom x7-E3950 45
+7.2%
Celeron N2920 42

Atom x7-E3950 outperforms Celeron N2920 by 7% in x264 encoding pass 1.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.21 0.61
Recency 30 August 2014 1 December 2013
Cost $57 $107
Chip lithography 14 nm 22 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 12 Watt 7 Watt

The Atom x7-E3950 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron N2920 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Atom x7-E3950 and Celeron N2920, 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 x7-E3950
Atom x7-E3950
Intel Celeron N2920
Celeron N2920

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.


2.5 44 votes

Rate Atom x7-E3950 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.5 32 votes

Rate Celeron N2920 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Atom x7-E3950 or Celeron N2920, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.