Intel Celeron N2808 vs Intel Celeron N2806

Intel Celeron N2808

► remove Intel N2808

The Intel Celeron N2808 is a power efficient dual-core SoC for entry-level notebooks. It is clocked at 1.58 - 2.25 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. The N2808 supports Intel Quick Sync and Wireless Display.

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 N2808 is clearly faster than previous Intel Atoms, e.g. the N2800. Depending on the benchmark, the N2808 competes with AMD APUs like the AMD E2-2000. 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 - 792 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 N2806

► remove Intel N2806

The Intel Celeron N2806 is a power efficient dual-core SoC for entry-level notebooks. It is clocked at 1.6 - 2.0 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 N2806 is faster than previous Intel Atoms, e.g. the N2800. Therefore, the N2806 competes with entry-level AMD APUs like the AMD E1-1200. 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 of 313 - 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 4.5 watts (2.5 W SDP). Thus, the chip can be used in passively cooled subnotebooks.

Intel Celeron N2808Intel Celeron N2806
Intel CeleronIntel Celeron
Bay Trail-MBay Trail-M
: Celeron Bay Trail-M
Intel Celeron N2940 (compare)1830 - 2250 MHz4 / 4
Intel Celeron N2930 (compare)1830 - 2160 MHz4 / 4
Intel Celeron N2920 (compare)1860 - 2000 MHz4 / 4
Intel Celeron N2840 (compare)2160 - 2580 MHz2 / 2
Intel Celeron N2910 (compare)1600 MHz4 / 4
Intel Celeron N2830 (compare)2160 - 2410 MHz2 / 2
Intel Celeron N2820 (compare)2170 - 2390 MHz2 / 2
Intel Celeron N2815 (compare)1860 - 2133 MHz2 / 2
Intel Celeron N2810 (compare)2000 MHz2 / 2
» Intel Celeron N28081580 - 2250 MHz2 / 2
Intel Celeron N2807 (compare)1580 - 2160 MHz2 / 2
Intel Celeron N28061580 - 2000 MHz2 / 2
Intel Celeron N2805 (compare)1460 MHz2 / 2
Intel Celeron N2940 (compare)1830 - 2250 MHz4 / 4
Intel Celeron N2930 (compare)1830 - 2160 MHz4 / 4
Intel Celeron N2920 (compare)1860 - 2000 MHz4 / 4
Intel Celeron N2840 (compare)2160 - 2580 MHz2 / 2
Intel Celeron N2910 (compare)1600 MHz4 / 4
Intel Celeron N2830 (compare)2160 - 2410 MHz2 / 2
Intel Celeron N2820 (compare)2170 - 2390 MHz2 / 2
Intel Celeron N2815 (compare)1860 - 2133 MHz2 / 2
Intel Celeron N2810 (compare)2000 MHz2 / 2
Intel Celeron N28081580 - 2250 MHz2 / 2
Intel Celeron N2807 (compare)1580 - 2160 MHz2 / 2
» Intel Celeron N28061580 - 2000 MHz2 / 2
Intel Celeron N2805 (compare)1460 MHz2 / 2
1580 - 2250 MHz1580 - 2000 MHz
112 KB112 KB
1 MB1 MB
2 / 22 / 2
4.3 4.5
22 22
105 °C105 °C
FCBGA1170FCBGA1170
Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail, 313 - 792 MHz), Wireless Display, Quick Sync, SpeedstepIntel HD Graphics (Bay Trail, 313 - 756 MHz), max. 4 GB DDR3L-1066, Execution Disable Bit, Speedstep
iGPUIntel HD Graphics (Bay Trail) (313 - 792 MHz)Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail) (313 - 756 MHz)
Intel Celeron N2808Intel Celeron N2806
$107 U.S.

Cinebench R15 - CPU Multi 64Bit
58 Points (1%)
Cinebench R15 - CPU Single 64Bit
26 Points (12%)
Cinebench R11.5 - CPU Multi 64Bit
0.6 Points (2%)
3DMark 06 - CPU
1195 Points (8%)

Average Benchmarks Intel Celeron N2806 → 100%

-
-
* 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), 2019, 2018
v1.8.1a
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)