Celeron N4100 vs N2815

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

Comparing Celeron N2815 and Celeron N4100 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance rankingnot rated2020
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel CeleronIntel Celeron
Architecture codenameBay Trail-M (2013−2014)Gemini Lake (2019)
Release date1 December 2013 (10 years ago)11 December 2017 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$107$107
Current price$270 (2.5x MSRP)$269 (2.5x MSRP)

Detailed specifications

Celeron N2815 and Celeron N4100 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 speed1.86 GHz1.1 GHz
Boost clock speed2.13 GHz2.4 GHz
L1 cache112 KB256 KB
L2 cache1 MB4 MB
Chip lithography22 nm14 nm
Maximum core temperature105 °C105 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplierNoNo

Compatibility

Information on Celeron N2815 and Celeron N4100 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 (Uniprocessor)
SocketFCBGA1170BGA1090
Power consumption (TDP)7.5 Watt6 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron N2815 and Celeron N4100. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NIno data+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron N2815 and Celeron N4100 are enumerated here.

VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron N2815 and Celeron N4100. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR4
Maximum memory sizeno data8 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
Maximum memory bandwidthno data38.397 GB/s
ECC memory supportno data-

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Intel HD GraphicsIntel UHD Graphics 600

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron N2815 and Celeron N4100.

PCI Express lanes46

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
Celeron N4100 2443
+394%

N4100 outperforms N2815 by 394% 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 N4100 313
+107%

N4100 outperforms N2815 by 107% in GeekBench 5 Single-Core.

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 N4100 833
+231%

N4100 outperforms N2815 by 231% 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
Celeron N4100 2013
+88.5%

N4100 outperforms N2815 by 88% 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
Celeron N4100 5904
+190%

N4100 outperforms N2815 by 190% 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
Celeron N4100 19.41
+198%

N2815 outperforms N4100 by 198% 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 N4100 2
+216%

N4100 outperforms N2815 by 216% 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 N4100 198
+257%

N4100 outperforms N2815 by 257% 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
Celeron N4100 69
+111%

N4100 outperforms N2815 by 111% 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 N4100 0.83
+131%

N4100 outperforms N2815 by 131% 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 N4100 1.7
+1600%

N4100 outperforms N2815 by 1600% 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 N4100 1139
+91.8%

N4100 outperforms N2815 by 92% in WinRAR 4.0.

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
Celeron N4100 12
+160%

N4100 outperforms N2815 by 160% in x264 encoding pass 2.

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
Celeron N4100 58
+141%

N4100 outperforms N2815 by 141% in x264 encoding pass 1.

Geekbench 3 32-bit multi-core

Benchmark coverage: 5%

Celeron N2815 1343
Celeron N4100 5042
+275%

N4100 outperforms N2815 by 275% in Geekbench 3 32-bit multi-core.

Geekbench 3 32-bit single-core

Benchmark coverage: 5%

Celeron N2815 781
Celeron N4100 1629
+109%

N4100 outperforms N2815 by 109% in Geekbench 3 32-bit single-core.

Pros & cons summary


Recency 1 December 2013 11 December 2017
Physical cores 2 4
Threads 2 4
Chip lithography 22 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 7 Watt 6 Watt

Celeron N4100 has an age advantage of 4 years, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, a 57.1% more advanced lithography process, and 16.7% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Celeron N2815 and Celeron N4100. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron N2815 and Celeron N4100, 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 N4100
Celeron N4100

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
3.5 420 votes

Rate Celeron N4100 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 N4100, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.