Celeron N2805 vs 1037U
Primary details
Comparing Celeron 1037U and Celeron N2805 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 2661 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | Intel Celeron | Intel Celeron |
| Architecture codename | Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) | Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) |
| Release date | 20 January 2013 (11 years ago) | 11 September 2013 (10 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $86 | $107 |
| Current price | $246 (2.9x MSRP) | $130 (1.2x MSRP) |
Detailed specifications
Celeron 1037U and Celeron N2805 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 cores | 2 (Dual-core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 2 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | 1.8 GHz | 1.46 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.8 GHz | 1.46 GHz |
| L1 cache | 64K (per core) | 56K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 256K (per core) | 512K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 2 MB (shared) | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 22 nm | 22 nm |
| Die size | 118 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | 105 °C | 80 °C |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 105 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 1,400 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron 1037U and Celeron N2805 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 configuration | 1 | 1 |
| Socket | FCBGA1023 | FCBGA1170 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 17 Watt | 4.3 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 1037U and Celeron N2805. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2 | no data |
| AES-NI | - | - |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| My WiFi | - | no data |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | - |
| Idle States | + | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | no data |
| Flex Memory Access | + | no data |
| Smart Connect | no data | + |
| FDI | + | no data |
| Fast Memory Access | + | no data |
| Status | Discontinued | Discontinued |
| RST | no data | - |
Security technologies
Celeron 1037U and Celeron N2805 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | - | no data |
| EDB | + | + |
| Identity Protection | no data | - |
| Anti-Theft | - | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron 1037U and Celeron N2805 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | - | - |
| VT-x | + | + |
| EPT | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron 1037U and Celeron N2805. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR3 |
| Maximum memory size | 32 GB | 4 GB |
| Max memory channels | 2 | 1 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 25.6 GB/s | no data |
| ECC memory support | - | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Intel® HD Graphics for 3rd Generation Intel® Processors | Intel® HD Graphics for Intel Atom® Processor Z3700 Series |
| Quick Sync Video | - | - |
| Clear Video HD | - | - |
| Graphics max frequency | 1 GHz | 667 MHz |
| InTru 3D | - | - |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Celeron 1037U and Celeron N2805 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | 3 | 2 |
| eDP | + | no data |
| DisplayPort | + | no data |
| HDMI | + | no data |
| SDVO | + | no data |
| CRT | + | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron 1037U and Celeron N2805.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | 2.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 16 | 4 |
| USB revision | no data | 3.0 and 2.0 |
| Total number of SATA ports | no data | 2 |
| Number of USB ports | no data | 5 |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
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%
1037U outperforms N2805 by 198% 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%
1037U outperforms N2805 by 231% 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%
1037U outperforms N2805 by 237% 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%
1037U outperforms N2805 by 115% 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%
N2805 outperforms 1037U by 105% in wPrime 32.
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%
1037U outperforms N2805 by 100% 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%
1037U outperforms N2805 by 44% 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%
1037U outperforms N2805 by 172% 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%
1037U outperforms N2805 by 170% in x264 encoding pass 1.
Geekbench 2
Benchmark coverage: 5%
1037U outperforms N2805 by 134% in Geekbench 2.
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 20 January 2013 | 11 September 2013 |
| Cost | $86 | $107 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 17 Watt | 4 Watt |
We couldn't decide between Celeron 1037U and Celeron N2805. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron 1037U and Celeron N2805, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
