Celeron N2805 vs Xeon L5335
Aggregate performance score
Xeon L5335 outperforms Celeron N2805 by a whopping 419% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Xeon L5335 and Celeron N2805 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2402 | 3205 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.11 | no data |
| Market segment | Server | Laptop |
| Series | no data | Intel Celeron |
| Power efficiency | 2.06 | 4.97 |
| Architecture codename | Clovertown (2006−2007) | Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) |
| Release date | 13 August 2007 (17 years ago) | 11 September 2013 (11 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $380 | $107 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Xeon L5335 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 | 4 (Quad-Core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | 2 GHz | 1.46 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2 GHz | 1.46 GHz |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 56K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 4 MB (per die) | 512K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 8 MB L2 Cache | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 22 nm |
| Die size | 2x 143 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 80 °C |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 60 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 582 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| VID voltage range | 1.1V-1.25V | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Xeon L5335 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 | 2 | 1 |
| Socket | PLGA771 | FCBGA1170 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 50 Watt | 4.3 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon L5335 and Celeron N2805. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | - | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | - |
| Idle States | + | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | - |
| Demand Based Switching | - | no data |
| Smart Connect | no data | + |
| FSB parity | - | no data |
| RST | no data | - |
Security technologies
Xeon L5335 and Celeron N2805 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | + | no data |
| EDB | + | + |
| Anti-Theft | no data | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon L5335 and Celeron N2805 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | no data | - |
| VT-x | + | + |
| EPT | - | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon L5335 and Celeron N2805. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR2, DDR3 Depends on motherboard | 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 | N/A | Intel® HD Graphics for Intel Atom® Processor Z3700 Series |
| Graphics max frequency | no data | 667 MHz |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Xeon L5335 and Celeron N2805 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | no data | 2 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon L5335 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.
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.09 | 0.21 |
| Recency | 13 August 2007 | 11 September 2013 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 2 |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 22 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 50 Watt | 4 Watt |
Xeon L5335 has a 419% higher aggregate performance score, and 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.
Celeron N2805, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 6 years, a 195.5% more advanced lithography process, and 1150% lower power consumption.
The Xeon L5335 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron N2805 in performance tests.
Be aware that Xeon L5335 is a server/workstation processor while Celeron N2805 is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon L5335 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.
