Atom N2800 vs Celeron N3150

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron N3150
2015
4 cores / 4 threads, 6 Watt
0.75
+168%
Atom N2800
2011
2 cores / 4 threads, 6 Watt
0.28

Celeron N3150 outperforms Atom N2800 by a whopping 168% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron N3150 and Atom N2800 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking26683133
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel CeleronIntel Atom
Power efficiency11.823.78
Architecture codenameBraswell (2015−2016)Cedarview-M (2011−2012)
Release date1 April 2015 (9 years ago)1 December 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$107$47

Detailed specifications

Celeron N3150 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 speed2.08 GHz1.87 GHz
Bus typeIDIno data
L1 cacheno data64 KB (per core)
L2 cache2 MB512K (per core)
L3 cache0 KB0 KB
Chip lithography14 nm32 nm
Die sizeno data66 mm2
Maximum core temperature90 °Cno data
Number of transistorsno data176 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Celeron N3150 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 configuration1 (Uniprocessor)1
SocketFCBGA1170FCBGA559
Power consumption (TDP)6 Watt6.5 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron N3150 and Atom N2800. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

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

Security technologies

Celeron N3150 and Atom N2800 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT--
EDB++
Secure Boot+no data
Secure Key+no data
Identity Protection+-
OS Guard-no data
Anti-Theft-no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron N3150 and Atom N2800 are enumerated here.

VT-d--
VT-x+-
VT-i-no data
EPT+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron N3150 and Atom N2800. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

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

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Intel HD Graphics for Intel Celeron Processor N3000 SeriesIntel Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 3650 (640 MHz)
Max video memory8 GBno data
Quick Sync Video+-
Clear Video+no data
Clear Video HD+no data
Graphics max frequency640 MHzno data
Execution Units12no data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron N3150 and Atom N2800 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported3no data
eDP+no data
DisplayPort+-
HDMI+-

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Celeron N3150 and Atom N2800 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectX+no data
OpenGL+no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron N3150 and Atom N2800.

PCIe version2.0no data
PCI Express lanes4no data
USB revision2.0/3.0no data
Total number of SATA ports2no data
Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Ports2no data
Number of USB ports5no data
Integrated LAN-no data
UART+no 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 N3150 0.75
+168%
Atom N2800 0.28

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 N3150 1189
+168%
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 N3150 1085
+67.4%
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 N3150 3624
+98.1%
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 N3150 2053
+113%
Atom N2800 965

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 N3150 30.11
+80.3%
Atom N2800 54.3

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.

Celeron N3150 0.8
+1540%
Atom N2800 0.1

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.

Celeron N3150 915
+46.4%
Atom N2800 625

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.  

Celeron N3150 9
+144%
Atom N2800 4

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.  

Celeron N3150 45
+127%
Atom N2800 20

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.75 0.28
Recency 1 April 2015 1 December 2011
Physical cores 4 2
Chip lithography 14 nm 32 nm

Celeron N3150 has a 167.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, 100% more physical cores, and a 128.6% more advanced lithography process.

The Celeron N3150 is our recommended choice as it beats the Atom N2800 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron N3150 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 N3150
Celeron N3150
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.


3.3 61 vote

Rate Celeron N3150 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.7 104 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 N3150 or Atom N2800, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.