Atom x5-E3940 vs Celeron N2807

VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron N2807
2014
2 cores / 2 threads, 4 Watt
0.31
Atom x5-E3940
2014
4 cores / 4 threads, 10 Watt
1.23
+297%

Atom x5-E3940 outperforms Celeron N2807 by a whopping 297% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron N2807 and Atom x5-E3940 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking31082324
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel Celeron5x Intel Atom
Power efficiency7.3011.58
Architecture codenameBay Trail-M (2013−2014)Apollo Lake (2014−2016)
Release date23 February 2014 (10 years ago)30 August 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$107no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron N2807 and Atom x5-E3940 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 speed1.58 GHz1.6 GHz
Boost clock speed2.16 GHz1.8 GHz
L1 cache56K (per core)56K (per core)
L2 cache512K (per core)2 MB (shared)
L3 cache0 KB0 KB
Chip lithography22 nm14 nm
Maximum core temperature105 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data103 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Celeron N2807 and Atom x5-E3940 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 configuration11 (Uniprocessor)
SocketFCBGA1170Intel BGA 1296
Power consumption (TDP)4.3 Watt10 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron N2807 and Atom x5-E3940. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI-+
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 N2807 and Atom x5-E3940 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+
EDB+no data
Secure Key+no data
Anti-Theft-no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron N2807 and Atom x5-E3940 are enumerated here.

VT-d-+
VT-x++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron N2807 and Atom x5-E3940. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3-1866
Maximum memory size4 GB8 GB
Max memory channels1no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Intel HD Graphics for Intel Atom Processor Z3700 SeriesIntel HD Graphics 500
Quick Sync Video+-
Graphics max frequency750 MHzno data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron N2807 and Atom x5-E3940 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported2no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron N2807 and Atom x5-E3940.

PCIe version2.02.0
PCI Express lanes44
USB revision3.0 and 2.0no data
Total number of SATA ports2no data
Number of USB ports5no 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 N2807 0.31
Atom x5-E3940 1.23
+297%

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 N2807 486
Atom x5-E3940 1953
+302%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.31 1.23
Recency 23 February 2014 30 August 2014
Physical cores 2 4
Threads 2 4
Chip lithography 22 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 4 Watt 10 Watt

Celeron N2807 has 150% lower power consumption.

Atom x5-E3940, on the other hand, has a 296.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 months, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and a 57.1% more advanced lithography process.

The Atom x5-E3940 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron N2807 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron N2807 and Atom x5-E3940, 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 N2807
Celeron N2807
Intel Atom x5-E3940
Atom x5-E3940

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.


2.4 36 votes

Rate Celeron N2807 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.1 7 votes

Rate Atom x5-E3940 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron N2807 or Atom x5-E3940, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.