Celeron N2810 vs N2815

#ad
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

Comparing Celeron N2815 and Celeron N2810 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance rankingnot ratednot rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel CeleronIntel Celeron
Architecture codenameBay Trail-M (2013−2014)Bay Trail-M (2013−2014)
Release date1 December 2013 (10 years ago)11 September 2013 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$107$260
Current price$270 (2.5x MSRP)$150 (0.6x MSRP)

Detailed specifications

Celeron N2815 and Celeron N2810 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)
Threads22
Base clock speed1.86 GHz2 GHz
Boost clock speed2.13 GHz2 GHz
L1 cache112 KB56K (per core)
L2 cache1 MB512K (per core)
L3 cache1 MB0 KB
Chip lithography22 nm22 nm
Maximum core temperature105 °C100 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplierNoNo

Compatibility

Information on Celeron N2815 and Celeron N2810 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 configurationno data1
SocketFCBGA1170FCBGA1170
Power consumption (TDP)7.5 Watt7.5 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron N2815 and Celeron N2810. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI--
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Turbo Boost Technology--
Hyper-Threading Technology--
Idle States++
Smart Connect++
StatusDiscontinuedDiscontinued
RST--

Security technologies

Celeron N2815 and Celeron N2810 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

EDB++
Identity Protection--
Anti-Theft--

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron N2815 and Celeron N2810 are enumerated here.

VT-d--
VT-x++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron N2815 and Celeron N2810. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3L-1066DDR3
Maximum memory size8 GB8 GB
Max memory channels22

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel® HD Graphics for Intel Atom® Processor Z3700 SeriesIntel® HD Graphics for Intel Atom® Processor Z3700 Series
Quick Sync Video--
Clear Video HD--
Graphics max frequency756 MHz756 MHz
InTru 3D--

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron N2815 and Celeron N2810 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported22

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron N2815 and Celeron N2810.

PCIe version2.02.0
PCI Express lanes44
USB revision3.0 and 2.03.0 and 2.0
Total number of SATA ports22
Number of USB ports55

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%

Celeron N2815 495
+17.9%
Celeron N2810 420

N2815 outperforms N2810 by 18% in Passmark.

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

Benchmark coverage: 42%

Celeron N2815 151
Celeron N2810 151

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

Benchmark coverage: 42%

Celeron N2815 252
Celeron N2810 274
+8.7%

N2810 outperforms N2815 by 9% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.

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%

Celeron N2815 1068
+7.6%
Celeron N2810 993

N2815 outperforms N2810 by 8% 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%

Celeron N2815 2038
+38.3%
Celeron N2810 1474

N2815 outperforms N2810 by 38% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.

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%

Celeron N2815 57.8
+9.7%
Celeron N2810 63.4

N2810 outperforms N2815 by 10% in wPrime 32.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

Celeron N2815 1
Celeron N2810 1
+4.3%

N2810 outperforms N2815 by 4% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core.

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.

Benchmark coverage: 15%

Celeron N2815 56
Celeron N2810 59
+6.3%

N2810 outperforms N2815 by 6% in Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core.

Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R15 (standing for Release 15) is a benchmark made by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version (sometimes called Single-Thread) only uses a single processor thread to render a room full of reflective spheres and light sources.

Benchmark coverage: 15%

Celeron N2815 33
+4.8%
Celeron N2810 31

N2815 outperforms N2810 by 5% in Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core.

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R11.5 is an old benchmark by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version loads a single thread with ray tracing to render a glossy room full of crystal spheres and light sources.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

Celeron N2815 0.36
Celeron N2810 0.37
+2.8%

N2810 outperforms N2815 by 3% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core.

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%

Celeron N2815 0.1
Celeron N2810 0.1
+10%

N2810 outperforms N2815 by 10% 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%

Celeron N2815 594
Celeron N2810 680
+14.5%

N2810 outperforms N2815 by 14% in WinRAR 4.0.

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%

Celeron N2815 24
+5.6%
Celeron N2810 23

N2815 outperforms N2810 by 6% in x264 encoding pass 1.

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%

Celeron N2815 5
+6.3%
Celeron N2810 4

N2815 outperforms N2810 by 6% in x264 encoding pass 2.

Geekbench 3 32-bit multi-core

Benchmark coverage: 5%

Celeron N2815 1343
+1.1%
Celeron N2810 1328

N2815 outperforms N2810 by 1% in Geekbench 3 32-bit multi-core.

Geekbench 3 32-bit single-core

Benchmark coverage: 5%

Celeron N2815 781
+2.5%
Celeron N2810 762

N2815 outperforms N2810 by 2% in Geekbench 3 32-bit single-core.

Geekbench 2

Benchmark coverage: 5%

Celeron N2815 1917
+1%
Celeron N2810 1898

N2815 outperforms N2810 by 1% in Geekbench 2.

Pros & cons summary


Recency 1 December 2013 11 September 2013
Cost $107 $260

We couldn't decide between Celeron N2815 and Celeron N2810. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron N2815 and Celeron N2810, 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 N2815
Celeron N2815
Intel Celeron N2810
Celeron N2810

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.


3.3 35 votes

Rate Celeron N2815 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 28 votes

Rate Celeron N2810 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron N2815 or Celeron N2810, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.