Celeron N2920 vs 4305UE
Aggregate performance score
Celeron 4305UE outperforms Celeron N2920 by an impressive 80% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2664 | 3053 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 1.22 | 0.04 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | no data | Intel Celeron |
| Power efficiency | 2.73 | 3.26 |
| Designer | Intel | Intel |
| Manufacturer | Intel | Intel |
| Architecture codename | Whiskey Lake-U (2018−2019) | Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) |
| Release date | 1 October 2018 (7 years ago) | 1 December 2013 (11 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $107 | $107 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Celeron 4305UE has 2950% better value for money than Celeron N2920.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
Celeron 4305UE 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 cores | 2 (Dual-core) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 1.86 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2 GHz | 2 GHz |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 56K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 256 KB (per core) | 512K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 2 MB (shared) | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 10 nm | 22 nm |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 105 °C |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | + | - |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron 4305UE 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 configuration | 1 | 1 |
| Socket | Intel BGA 1528 | FCBGA1170 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 7.5 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 4305UE and Celeron N2920. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | - |
| AVX | + | - |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | - |
| Idle States | no data | + |
| Smart Connect | no data | + |
| RST | no data | - |
Security technologies
Celeron 4305UE and Celeron N2920 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| EDB | no data | + |
| Anti-Theft | no data | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron 4305UE and Celeron N2920 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | + | - |
| VT-x | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron 4305UE and Celeron N2920. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 | DDR3 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 8 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Intel UHD Graphics 610 | Intel HD Graphics for Intel Atom Processor Z3700 Series |
| Graphics max frequency | no data | 844 MHz |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Celeron 4305UE and Celeron N2920 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | no data | 2 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron 4305UE and Celeron N2920.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | 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 benchmarks
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.
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. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.97 | 0.54 |
| Integrated graphics card | 1.65 | 0.68 |
| Recency | 1 October 2018 | 1 December 2013 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 4 |
| Threads | 2 | 4 |
| Chip lithography | 10 nm | 22 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 7 Watt |
Celeron 4305UE has a 79.6% higher aggregate performance score, 142.6% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 4 years, and a 120% more advanced lithography process.
Celeron N2920, on the other hand, has 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and 114.3% lower power consumption.
The Intel Celeron 4305UE is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Celeron N2920 in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
