Atom N2800 vs Celeron 847

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron 847
2011
2 cores / 2 threads, 17 Watt
0.30
+7.1%
Atom N2800
2011
2 cores / 4 threads, 6 Watt
0.28

Celeron 847 outperforms Atom N2800 by a small 7% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron 847 and Atom N2800 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking31133133
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel CeleronIntel Atom
Power efficiency1.673.78
Architecture codenameSandy Bridge (2011−2013)Cedarview-M (2011−2012)
Release date19 June 2011 (13 years ago)1 December 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$134$47

Detailed specifications

Celeron 847 and Atom N2800 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)
Threads24
Base clock speed1.1 GHz1.86 GHz
Boost clock speed1.1 GHz1.87 GHz
Bus typeDMI 2.0no data
Bus rate4 × 5 GT/sno data
Multiplier11no data
L1 cache64K (per core)64 KB (per core)
L2 cache256K (per core)512K (per core)
L3 cache2 MB (shared)0 KB
Chip lithography32 nm32 nm
Die size131 mm266 mm2
Maximum core temperature100 °Cno data
Number of transistors504 million176 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Celeron 847 and Atom N2800 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
SocketFCBGA1023FCBGA559
Power consumption (TDP)17 Watt6.5 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 847 and Atom N2800. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2Intel® SSE2, Intel® SSE3, Intel® SSSE3
FMA+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Turbo Boost Technology--
Hyper-Threading Technology-+
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring++
Flex Memory Access+no data
Demand Based Switching--
FDI+no data
Fast Memory Access+no data

Security technologies

Celeron 847 and Atom N2800 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT--
EDB++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron 847 and Atom N2800 are enumerated here.

VT-d--
VT-x+-
EPT+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron 847 and Atom N2800. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3
Maximum memory size16 GB4.88 GB
Max memory channels21
Maximum memory bandwidth21.335 GB/sno data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Intel HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) (350 - 800 MHz)Intel Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 3650 (640 MHz)
Graphics max frequency800 MHzno data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron 847 and Atom N2800 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported2no data
eDP+no data
DisplayPort+-
HDMI+-
SDVO+no data
CRT+no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron 847 and Atom N2800.

PCIe version2.0no data
PCI Express lanes16no 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.

Celeron 847 0.30
+7.1%
Atom N2800 0.28

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.

Celeron 847 479
+7.9%
Atom N2800 444

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.

Celeron 847 1270
+95.9%
Atom N2800 648

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.

Celeron 847 2408
+31.6%
Atom N2800 1829

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.

Celeron 847 993
+2.8%
Atom N2800 965

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.

Celeron 847 80.4
Atom N2800 54.3
+48.1%

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.

Celeron 847 0.1
+60%
Atom N2800 0.1

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.

Celeron 847 824
+31.8%
Atom N2800 625

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.30 0.28
Recency 19 June 2011 1 December 2011
Threads 2 4
Power consumption (TDP) 17 Watt 6 Watt

Celeron 847 has a 7.1% higher aggregate performance score.

Atom N2800, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 5 months, 100% more threads, and 183.3% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Celeron 847 and Atom N2800.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron 847 and Atom N2800, 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 Celeron 847
Celeron 847
Intel Atom N2800
Atom N2800

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.


2.8 389 votes

Rate Celeron 847 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.7 104 votes

Rate Atom N2800 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron 847 or Atom N2800, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.