Celeron N2815 vs E-450

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

Comparing E-450 and Celeron N2815 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
SeriesAMD E-SeriesIntel Celeron
Architecture codenameZacate (2011−2013)Bay Trail-M (2013−2014)
Release date22 August 2011 (12 years ago)1 December 2013 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$107
Current price$125 $270 (2.5x MSRP)

Detailed specifications

E-450 and Celeron N2815 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 speedno data1.86 GHz
Boost clock speed1.65 GHz2.13 GHz
L1 cache64K (per core)112 KB
L2 cache512K (per core)1 MB
L3 cache0 KB1 MB
Chip lithography40 nm22 nm
Die size75 mm2no data
Maximum core temperatureno data105 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplierNoNo

Compatibility

Information on E-450 and Celeron N2815 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 configuration1no data
SocketFT1 BGA 413-BallFCBGA1170
Power consumption (TDP)18 Watt7.5 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by E-450 and Celeron N2815. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsMMX(+), SSE(1,2,3,3S,4A), AMD-Vno data
AES-NIno data-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data+
Smart Connectno data+
Statusno dataDiscontinued
RSTno data-

Security technologies

E-450 and Celeron N2815 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

EDBno data+
Identity Protectionno data-
Anti-Theftno data-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by E-450 and Celeron N2815 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+no data
VT-dno data-
VT-xno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by E-450 and Celeron N2815. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3 Single-channelDDR3L-1066
Maximum memory sizeno data8 GB
Max memory channelsno data2

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon HD 6320Intel® HD Graphics for Intel Atom® Processor Z3700 Series
Graphics max frequencyno data756 MHz

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of E-450 and Celeron N2815 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data2

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by E-450 and Celeron N2815.

PCIe versionno data2.0
PCI Express lanesno data4
USB revisionno data3.0 and 2.0
Total number of SATA portsno data2
Number of USB portsno data5

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%

E-450 765
+54.5%
Celeron N2815 495

E-450 outperforms Celeron N2815 by 55% 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%

E-450 109
Celeron N2815 151
+38.5%

Celeron N2815 outperforms E-450 by 39% 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%

E-450 176
Celeron N2815 252
+43.2%

Celeron N2815 outperforms E-450 by 43% 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%

E-450 1063
Celeron N2815 1068
+0.5%

Celeron N2815 outperforms E-450 by 1% 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%

E-450 2021
Celeron N2815 2038
+0.9%

Celeron N2815 outperforms E-450 by 1% 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%

E-450 64.5
Celeron N2815 57.8
+11.6%

E-450 outperforms Celeron N2815 by 12% 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%

E-450 1
Celeron N2815 1
+11.3%

Celeron N2815 outperforms E-450 by 11% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-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%

E-450 0.32
Celeron N2815 0.36
+12.5%

Celeron N2815 outperforms E-450 by 13% 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%

E-450 0.1
Celeron N2815 0.1
+11.1%

Celeron N2815 outperforms E-450 by 11% 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%

E-450 489
Celeron N2815 594
+21.5%

Celeron N2815 outperforms E-450 by 21% 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%

E-450 3
Celeron N2815 5
+56.7%

Celeron N2815 outperforms E-450 by 57% 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%

E-450 16
Celeron N2815 24
+49%

Celeron N2815 outperforms E-450 by 49% in x264 encoding pass 1.

Pros & cons summary


Recency 22 August 2011 1 December 2013
Chip lithography 40 nm 22 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 18 Watt 7 Watt

We couldn't decide between E-450 and Celeron N2815. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions on choice between E-450 and Celeron N2815, 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.


AMD E-450
E-450
Intel Celeron N2815
Celeron N2815

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.


2.7 467 votes

Rate E-450 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 35 votes

Rate Celeron N2815 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about E-450 or Celeron N2815, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.