Intel Celeron N2807 vs Intel Celeron N2815

Intel Celeron N2807

► remove Intel N2807

The Intel Celeron N2807 is a power efficient dual-core SoC for entry-level notebooks. It is clocked at 1.6 - 2.2 GHz and part of the Bay Trail-M platform. Thanks to the specially optimized 22 nanometer low-power process (P1271) with tri-gate transistors, performance and energy efficiency have been significantly improved compared to previous Intel Atom CPUs.

Architecture

The processor cores are based on the new Silvermont architecture, which is an out-of-order design for the first time. The increased utilization of the pipeline and many other improvements (optimized branch prediction, increased buffers, enhanced decoders) have increased the performance per clock by about 50 percent. At the same time, however, the Hyper-Threading feature of the previous generation has been removed. Other major changes are the support for new instruction set extensions such as SSE 4.1 and 4.2 as well as AES-NI (depending on the model).

Performance

Thanks to the improved performance per clock, the Celeron N2807 is clearly faster than previous Intel Atoms, e.g. the N2800. According to our benchmarks, the N2807 competes with AMD APUs like the AMD E1-1500. For simple everyday tasks such as Internet or Office the performance is adequate, but not for more complex software or modern games.

Graphics

The graphics unit of Bay Trail is based on the Intel Gen7 architecture, which supports DirectX 11 and is also found in the Ivy Bridge series (e.g. HD Graphics 4000). With only 4 EUs (Execution Units) and a relatively low clock speed (313 - 750 MHz), the GPU is even slower than the HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge). Therefore, only older and less demanding games will run fluently.

Power Consumption

The entire SoC is rated at a TDP of 4.3 watts (3 W SDP). Thus, the chip can be used in compact subnotebooks.

Intel Celeron N2815

► remove Intel N2815

The Intel Celeron N2815 is a power efficient dual-core SoC for entry-level notebooks. It is clocked at 1.86 - 2.13 GHz and part of the Bay Trail-M platform. Thanks to the specially optimized 22 nanometer low-power process (P1271) with tri-gate transistors, performance and energy efficiency have been significantly improved compared to previous Intel Atom CPUs.

Architecture

The processor cores are based on the new Silvermont architecture, which is an out-of-order design for the first time. The increased utilization of the pipeline and many other improvements (optimized branch prediction, increased buffers, enhanced decoders) have increased the performance per clock by about 50 percent. At the same time, however, the Hyper-Threading feature of the previous generation has been removed. Other major changes are the support for new instruction set extensions such as SSE 4.1 and 4.2 as well as AES-NI (depending on the model).

Performance

Thanks to the improved performance per clock, the Celeron N2815 is faster than previous Intel Atoms, e.g. the N2800. According to our benchmarks, the N2815 even competes with AMD APUs like the AMD A4-4355M. For simple everyday tasks such as Internet or Office the performance is adequate, but not for complex software or modern games.

Graphics

The graphics unit of Bay Trail is based on the Intel Gen7 architecture, which supports DirectX 11 and is also found in the Ivy Bridge series (e.g. HD Graphics 4000). With only 4 EUs (Execution Units) and a relatively low clock speed of up to 756 MHz, the GPU is even slower than the HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge). Therefore, only older and less demanding games will run fluently.

Power Consumption

The entire SoC is rated at a TDP of 7.5 watts. Thus, the chip can be used in compact subnotebooks.

Intel Celeron N2807Intel Celeron N2815
Intel CeleronIntel Celeron
Bay Trail-MBay Trail-M
: Celeron Bay Trail-M
Intel Celeron N2940 compare1.83 - 2.25 GHz4 / 4
Intel Celeron N2930 compare1.83 - 2.16 GHz4 / 4
Intel Celeron N2920 compare1.86 - 2 GHz4 / 4
Intel Celeron N2840 compare2.16 - 2.58 GHz2 / 2
Intel Celeron N2910 compare1.6 GHz4 / 4
Intel Celeron N2830 compare2.16 - 2.41 GHz2 / 2
Intel Celeron N2820 compare2.17 - 2.39 GHz2 / 2
Intel Celeron N28151.86 - 2.13 GHz2 / 2
Intel Celeron N2810 compare2 GHz2 / 2
Intel Celeron N2808 compare1.58 - 2.25 GHz2 / 2
» Intel Celeron N28071.58 - 2.16 GHz2 / 2
Intel Celeron N2806 compare1.58 - 2 GHz2 / 2
Intel Celeron N2805 compare1.46 GHz2 / 2
Intel Celeron N2940 compare1.83 - 2.25 GHz4 / 4
Intel Celeron N2930 compare1.83 - 2.16 GHz4 / 4
Intel Celeron N2920 compare1.86 - 2 GHz4 / 4
Intel Celeron N2840 compare2.16 - 2.58 GHz2 / 2
Intel Celeron N2910 compare1.6 GHz4 / 4
Intel Celeron N2830 compare2.16 - 2.41 GHz2 / 2
Intel Celeron N2820 compare2.17 - 2.39 GHz2 / 2
» Intel Celeron N28151.86 - 2.13 GHz2 / 2
Intel Celeron N2810 compare2 GHz2 / 2
Intel Celeron N2808 compare1.58 - 2.25 GHz2 / 2
Intel Celeron N28071.58 - 2.16 GHz2 / 2
Intel Celeron N2806 compare1.58 - 2 GHz2 / 2
Intel Celeron N2805 compare1.46 GHz2 / 2
1580 - 2160 MHz1860 - 2133 MHz
112 KB112 KB
1 MB1 MB
2 / 22 / 2
4.3 7.5
22 22
105 °C105 °C
FCBGA1170FCBGA1170
Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail, 313 - 750 MHz), Wireless Display, Quick Sync, SpeedstepHD Graphics (Bay Trail, max. 756 MHz)
iGPUIntel HD Graphics (Bay Trail) (313 - 750 MHz)Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail) (313 - 756 MHz)
Architecturex86x86
$107 U.S.$107 U.S.
Intel Celeron N2807Intel Celeron N2815

Cinebench R15 - Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64 Bit
65 Points (1%)
min: 49     avg: 55.5     median: 55.5 (1%)     max: 62 Points
Cinebench R15 - Cinebench R15 CPU Single 64 Bit
35 Points (13%)
min: 31     avg: 32.5     median: 32.5 (12%)     max: 34 Points
Cinebench R11.5 - Cinebench R11.5 CPU Multi 64 Bit
0.5 Points (1%)
min: 0.62     avg: 0.7     median: 0.7 (1%)     max: 0.76 Points
Cinebench R11.5 - Cinebench R11.5 CPU Single 64 Bit
0.3 Points (8%)
min: 0.32     avg: 0.4     median: 0.4 (11%)     max: 0.4 Points
Cinebench R10 - Cinebench R10 Rend. Single (32bit)
986 (9%)
1068 (10%)
Cinebench R10 - Cinebench R10 Rend. Multi (32bit)
2093 (4%)
2038 (3%)
Cinebench R10 - Cinebench R10 Rend. Multi (64bit)
3047 Points (3%)
2781 Points (3%)
Cinebench R10 - Cinebench R10 Rend. Single (64bit)
1584 Points (12%)
1509 Points (11%)
wPrime 2.10 - wPrime 2.0 1024m *
1763 s (21%)
1818 s (21%)
wPrime 2.10 - wPrime 2.0 32m *
57.4 s (12%)
57.8 s (12%)
WinRAR - WinRAR 4.0
408 (3%)
594 (4%)
X264 HD Benchmark 4.0 - x264 Pass 2
3.2 fps (1%)
4.5 fps (2%)
X264 HD Benchmark 4.0 - x264 Pass 1
17 fps (5%)
24.1 fps (7%)
TrueCrypt - TrueCrypt Serpent
0 GB/s (0%)
0.1 GB/s (0%)
TrueCrypt - TrueCrypt Twofish
0.1 GB/s (0%)
0.1 GB/s (0%)
TrueCrypt - TrueCrypt AES
0.1 GB/s (0%)
0.1 GB/s (0%)
Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 1M - Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 1M *
38.8 s (8%)
42.3 s (9%)
Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 2M - Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 2M *
84.7 s (4%)
92.7 s (4%)
Super Pi Mod 1.5 XS 32M - Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 32M *
1806 s (8%)
1965 s (9%)
3DMark 11 - 3DM11 Performance Physics
976 Points (4%)
min: 850     avg: 872     median: 871.5 (4%)     max: 893 Points
3DMark - 3DMark Ice Storm Physics
6368 Points (4%)
min: 2209     avg: 5878     median: 5878 (4%)     max: 9547 Points
3DMark - 3DMark Cloud Gate Physics
548 Points (1%)
min: 166     avg: 459     median: 459 (1%)     max: 752 Points
3DMark - 3DMark Fire Strike Standard Physics
100%
1 N2815 +
1017 Points (3%)
Geekbench 2 - 32 Bit - Geekbench Stream
2249 Points (18%)
2183 Points (18%)
Geekbench 2 - 32 Bit - Geekbench Memory
1974 Points (18%)
1950 Points (18%)
Geekbench 2 - 32 Bit - Geekbench Floating Point
1391 Points (3%)
1747 Points (3%)
Geekbench 2 - 32 Bit - Geekbench Integer
1576 Points (3%)
1993 Points (4%)
Geekbench 2 - 32 Bit - Geekbench Total Score
1658 Points (4%)
1917 Points (5%)
Geekbench 3 - Geekbench 3 32 Bit Multi-Core
1089 (2%)
1343 (2%)
Geekbench 3 - Geekbench 3 32 Bit Single-Core
688 (14%)
781 (16%)

Average Benchmarks Intel Celeron N2807 → 100% n=29

Average Benchmarks Intel Celeron N2815 → 113% n=29

-
-
* Smaller numbers mean a higher performance
1 This benchmark is not used for the average calculation

Add one or more devices and compare

In the following list you can select (and also search for) devices that should be added to the comparison. You can select more than one device.

restrict list:

show all (including archived), 2020, 2019
v1.16
Please share our article, every link counts!
> Notebook / Laptop Reviews and News > Benchmarks / Tech > Processor Comparison - Head 2 Head
Redaktion, 2017-09- 8 (Update: 2017-09-11)