Celeron N2805 vs Ryzen 7 PRO 7840HS
Primary details
Comparing Ryzen 7 PRO 7840HS and Celeron N2805 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 344 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | AMD Phoenix (Zen 4, Ryzen 7040) | Intel Celeron |
| Architecture codename | Phoenix-HS (Zen 4) | Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) |
| Release date | 13 June 2023 (1 year ago) | 11 September 2013 (10 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $107 |
| Current price | no data | $130 (1.2x MSRP) |
Detailed specifications
Ryzen 7 PRO 7840HS and Celeron N2805 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 | 8 (Octa-Core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 16 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | 3.8 GHz | 1.46 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 5.1 GHz | 1.46 GHz |
| L1 cache | 512 KB | 56K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 8 MB | 512K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 16 MB | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 4 nm | 22 nm |
| Die size | 178 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | 80 °C |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | no data | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
Compatibility
Information on Ryzen 7 PRO 7840HS and Celeron N2805 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 | no data | 1 |
| Socket | FP7/FP8 | FCBGA1170 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 4.3 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 7 PRO 7840HS and Celeron N2805. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | no data | - |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | - |
| Idle States | no data | + |
| Smart Connect | no data | + |
| Status | no data | Discontinued |
| RST | no data | - |
Security technologies
Ryzen 7 PRO 7840HS and Celeron N2805 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| EDB | no data | + |
| Identity Protection | no data | - |
| Anti-Theft | no data | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 7 PRO 7840HS and Celeron N2805 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | no data | - |
| VT-x | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 7 PRO 7840HS and Celeron N2805. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR3 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 4 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 1 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | AMD Radeon 780M | Intel® HD Graphics for Intel Atom® Processor Z3700 Series |
| Graphics max frequency | no data | 667 MHz |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Ryzen 7 PRO 7840HS and Celeron N2805 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | no data | 2 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 7 PRO 7840HS and Celeron N2805.
| PCIe version | no data | 2.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 4 |
| USB revision | no data | 3.0 and 2.0 |
| Total number of SATA ports | no data | 2 |
| Number of USB ports | no data | 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%
Ryzen 7 PRO 7840HS outperforms Celeron N2805 by 7815% in Passmark.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 19%
Ryzen 7 PRO 7840HS outperforms Celeron N2805 by 1569% in 3DMark06 CPU.
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%
Ryzen 7 PRO 7840HS outperforms Celeron N2805 by 5445% 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%
Ryzen 7 PRO 7840HS outperforms Celeron N2805 by 1021% in Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core.
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 13 June 2023 | 11 September 2013 |
| Physical cores | 8 | 2 |
| Threads | 16 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 4 nm | 22 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 4 Watt |
We couldn't decide between Ryzen 7 PRO 7840HS and Celeron N2805. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 7 PRO 7840HS and Celeron N2805, 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.
