Celeron N2830 vs Pentium N3540
Primary details
Comparing Pentium N3540 and Celeron N2830 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 2533 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | Intel Pentium | Intel Celeron |
| Architecture codename | Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) | Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) |
| Release date | 22 May 2014 (10 years ago) | 23 February 2014 (10 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $251 | $107 |
| Current price | $404 (1.6x MSRP) | $234 (2.2x MSRP) |
Detailed specifications
Pentium N3540 and Celeron N2830 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 cores | 4 (Quad-Core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | 2.16 GHz | 2.16 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.66 GHz | 2.41 GHz |
| L1 cache | 224 KB | 56K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 2 MB | 512K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 2 MB L2 Cache | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 22 nm | 22 nm |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | 100 °C |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
Compatibility
Information on Pentium N3540 and Celeron N2830 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 configuration | 1 | 1 |
| Socket | FCBGA1170 | FCBGA1170 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 7.5 Watt | 7.5 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Pentium N3540 and Celeron N2830. 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 | + | + |
| SIPP | no data | - |
| Smart Connect | + | + |
| Status | Discontinued | Discontinued |
| RST | no data | - |
Security technologies
Pentium N3540 and Celeron N2830 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| EDB | + | + |
| Secure Key | + | + |
| Identity Protection | no data | - |
| Anti-Theft | - | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Pentium N3540 and Celeron N2830 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | - | - |
| VT-x | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Pentium N3540 and Celeron N2830. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3L-1333 | DDR3 |
| Maximum memory size | 8 GB | 8 GB |
| Max memory channels | 2 | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 21.32 GB/s | no data |
| ECC memory support | - | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Intel® HD Graphics for Intel Atom® Processor Z3700 Series | Intel® HD Graphics for Intel Atom® Processor Z3700 Series |
| Quick Sync Video | + | + |
| Clear Video HD | - | - |
| Graphics max frequency | 896 MHz | 750 MHz |
| InTru 3D | - | - |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Pentium N3540 and Celeron N2830 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | 2 | 2 |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by Pentium N3540 and Celeron N2830 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | 11.2 | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Pentium N3540 and Celeron N2830.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | 2.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 4 | 4 |
| USB revision | 3.0 and 2.0 | 3.0 and 2.0 |
| Total number of SATA ports | 2 | 2 |
| Number of USB ports | 5 | 5 |
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%
Pentium N3540 outperforms Celeron N2830 by 120% 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%
Pentium N3540 outperforms Celeron N2830 by 18% 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%
Pentium N3540 outperforms Celeron N2830 by 101% 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%
Pentium N3540 outperforms Celeron N2830 by 15% 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%
Pentium N3540 outperforms Celeron N2830 by 112% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.
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%
Pentium N3540 outperforms Celeron N2830 by 132% 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%
Pentium N3540 outperforms Celeron N2830 by 134% 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%
Pentium N3540 outperforms Celeron N2830 by 11% 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%
Pentium N3540 outperforms Celeron N2830 by 16% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core.
Geekbench 3 32-bit multi-core
Benchmark coverage: 5%
Pentium N3540 outperforms Celeron N2830 by 108% in Geekbench 3 32-bit multi-core.
Geekbench 3 32-bit single-core
Benchmark coverage: 5%
Pentium N3540 outperforms Celeron N2830 by 9% in Geekbench 3 32-bit single-core.
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 22 May 2014 | 23 February 2014 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 2 |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
| Cost | $251 | $107 |
We couldn't decide between Pentium N3540 and Celeron N2830. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Pentium N3540 and Celeron N2830, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
