Processor N200 vs Celeron B810

VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron B810
2011
2 cores / 2 threads, 35 Watt
0.49
Processor N200
2023
4 cores / 4 threads, 6 Watt
1.56
+218%

Processor N200 outperforms Celeron B810 by a whopping 218% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron B810 and Processor N200 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking28912110
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel CeleronIntel Alder Lake-N
Power efficiency1.3224.61
Architecture codenameSandy Bridge (2011−2013)Alder Lake-N (2023)
Release date1 March 2011 (13 years ago)3 January 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$86$193

Detailed specifications

Celeron B810 and Processor N200 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)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads24
Base clock speed1.6 GHz0.1 GHz
Boost clock speed1.6 GHz3.7 GHz
Bus typeDMI 2.0no data
Bus rate4 × 5 GT/sno data
Multiplier16no data
L1 cache64K (per core)96 KB (per core)
L2 cache256K (per core)2 MB (shared)
L3 cache2 MB (shared)6 MB (shared)
Chip lithography32 nm10 nm
Die size131 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature100 °C105 °C
Number of transistors504 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+

Compatibility

Information on Celeron B810 and Processor N200 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
SocketPGA988Intel BGA 1264
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt6 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron B810 and Processor N200. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

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

Security technologies

Celeron B810 and Processor N200 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-+
EDB+no data
Anti-Theft-no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron B810 and Processor N200 are enumerated here.

VT-d-+
VT-x++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron B810 and Processor N200. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR4, DDR5 4800 MHz Single-channel
Maximum memory size16.6 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidth21.335 GB/sno data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Intel HD Graphics for 2nd Generation Intel ProcessorsIntel UHD Graphics Xe 750 32EUs (Rocket Lake) (450 - 750 MHz)
Graphics max frequency950 MHzno data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron B810 and Processor N200 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 B810 and Processor N200.

PCIe version2.03.0
PCI Express lanes169

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 B810 0.49
Processor N200 1.56
+218%

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 B810 2091
Processor N200 3937
+88.3%

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 B810 4079
Processor N200 7549
+85.1%

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 B810 1633
Processor N200 3902
+139%

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 B810 44.75
Processor N200 25.99
+72.2%

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.

Celeron B810 1
Processor N200 3
+120%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.49 1.56
Integrated graphics card 0.77 3.28
Recency 1 March 2011 3 January 2023
Physical cores 2 4
Threads 2 4
Chip lithography 32 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 6 Watt

Processor N200 has a 218.4% higher aggregate performance score, 326% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 11 years, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, a 220% more advanced lithography process, and 483.3% lower power consumption.

The Processor N200 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron B810 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron B810 and Processor N200, 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 B810
Celeron B810
Intel Processor N200
Processor N200

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.


3 5 votes

Rate Celeron B810 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 145 votes

Rate Processor N200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron B810 or Processor N200, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.