Atom N2800 vs Celeron N2910

VS

Primary details

Comparing Celeron N2910 and Atom N2800 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the rankingnot ratednot rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel CeleronIntel Atom
Architecture codenameBay Trail-M (2013−2014)Cedarview-M (2011−2012)
Release date11 September 2013 (11 years ago)1 December 2011 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$47

Detailed specifications

Celeron N2910 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads44
Base clock speed1.6 GHz1.86 GHz
Boost clock speed1.6 GHz1.87 GHz
L1 cache56K (per core)64 KB (per core)
L2 cache512K (per core)512K (per core)
L3 cache0 KB0 KB
Chip lithography22 nm32 nm
Die sizeno data66 mm2
Maximum core temperature100 °Cno data
Number of transistorsno data176 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Celeron N2910 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 configuration11
SocketFCBGA1170FCBGA559
Power consumption (TDP)7.5 Watt6.5 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron N2910 and Atom N2800. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE2, Intel® SSE3, Intel® SSSE3
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Turbo Boost Technology--
Hyper-Threading Technology-+
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring-+
Demand Based Switchingno data-
Smart Connect+no data
RST-no data

Security technologies

Celeron N2910 and Atom N2800 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

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

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron N2910 and Atom N2800 are enumerated here.

VT-d--
VT-x+-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron N2910 and Atom N2800. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3
Maximum memory size8.79 GB4.88 GB
Max memory channels21

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel® HD Graphics for Intel Atom® Processor Z3700 SeriesIntel Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 3650
Graphics max frequency756 MHzno data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron N2910 and Atom N2800 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported2no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron N2910 and Atom N2800.

PCIe version2.0no data
PCI Express lanes4no data
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.



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 N2910 778
+75.2%
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 N2910 844
+30.2%
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 N2910 2907
+58.9%
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 N2910 1612
+67%
Atom N2800 965

Pros & cons summary


Recency 11 September 2013 1 December 2011
Physical cores 4 2
Chip lithography 22 nm 32 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 7 Watt 6 Watt

Celeron N2910 has an age advantage of 1 year, 100% more physical cores, and a 45.5% more advanced lithography process.

Atom N2800, on the other hand, has 16.7% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Celeron N2910 and Atom N2800. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron N2910 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 N2910
Celeron N2910
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.


4.6 10 votes

Rate Celeron N2910 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.7 103 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 N2910 or Atom N2800, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.