, , , , , ,
search relation.
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
 

Intel Celeron N2808 vs Intel Celeron N2910

Intel Celeron N2808

► remove from comparison 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 N2910

► remove from comparison Intel N2910

The Intel Celeron N2910 is a power efficient quad-core SoC for entry-level notebooks. It is clocked at up to 1.6 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 N2910 is significantly faster than previous Intel Atoms, e.g. the N2800. According to our benchmarks, the N2910 competes with AMD Kabini APUs like the A6-1450. 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 N2808Intel Celeron N2910
Intel CeleronIntel Celeron
Bay Trail-MBay Trail-M
Series: 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 N29101.6 GHz4 / 4
Intel Celeron N2830 compare2.16 - 2.41 GHz2 / 2
Intel Celeron N2820 compare2.17 - 2.39 GHz2 / 2
Intel Celeron N2815 compare1.86 - 2.13 GHz2 / 2
Intel Celeron N2810 compare2 GHz2 / 2
» Intel Celeron N28081.58 - 2.25 GHz2 / 2
Intel Celeron N2807 compare1.58 - 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 N29101.6 GHz4 / 4
Intel Celeron N2830 compare2.16 - 2.41 GHz2 / 2
Intel Celeron N2820 compare2.17 - 2.39 GHz2 / 2
Intel Celeron N2815 compare1.86 - 2.13 GHz2 / 2
Intel Celeron N2810 compare2 GHz2 / 2
Intel Celeron N28081.58 - 2.25 GHz2 / 2
Intel Celeron N2807 compare1.58 - 2.16 GHz2 / 2
Intel Celeron N2806 compare1.58 - 2 GHz2 / 2
Intel Celeron N2805 compare1.46 GHz2 / 2
1580 - 2250 MHz1600 MHz
112 KB224 KB
1 MB2 MB
2 / 24 / 4
4.3 7.5
22 22
105 °C100 °C
FCBGA1170
Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail, 313 - 792 MHz), Wireless Display, Quick Sync, Speedstep
iGPUIntel HD Graphics (Bay Trail) (313 - 792 MHz)Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail) (313 - 756 MHz)
Architecturex86x86
Intel Celeron N2808Intel Celeron N2910

Benchmarks

Cinebench R15 - Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64 Bit
100%
1 N2910 +
97 Points (1%)
Cinebench R15 - Cinebench R15 CPU Single 64 Bit
100%
1 N2910 +
27 Points (10%)
Cinebench R11.5 - Cinebench R11.5 CPU Multi 64 Bit
100%
1 N2910 +
1.1 Points (2%)
Cinebench R11.5 - Cinebench R11.5 CPU Single 64 Bit
100%
1 N2910 +
0.3 Points (10%)
Cinebench R10 - Cinebench R10 Rend. Single (32bit)
100%
1 N2910 +
844 (8%)
Cinebench R10 - Cinebench R10 Rend. Multi (32bit)
100%
1 N2910 +
2907 (5%)
Cinebench R10 - Cinebench R10 Rend. Multi (64bit)
100%
1 N2910 +
4302 Points (4%)
Cinebench R10 - Cinebench R10 Rend. Single (64bit)
100%
1 N2910 +
1206 Points (9%)
3DMark 06 - CPU - 3DMark 06 - CPU
100%
1 N2910 +
1612 Points (9%)
Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 1M - Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 1M *
100%
1 N2910 +
27 s (6%)
Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 2M - Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 2M *
100%
1 N2910 +
61 s (3%)
Super Pi Mod 1.5 XS 32M - Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 32M *
100%
1 N2910 +
1566 s (7%)
3DMark - 3DMark Ice Storm Physics
100%
1 N2910 +
13106 Points (8%)
3DMark - 3DMark Cloud Gate Physics
100%
1 N2910 +
1107 Points (3%)
3DMark - 3DMark Fire Strike Standard Physics
100%
1 N2910 +
1566 Points (4%)
Geekbench 2 - 32 Bit - Geekbench Stream
100%
1 N2910 +
2001 Points (16%)
Geekbench 2 - 32 Bit - Geekbench Memory
100%
1 N2910 +
1743 Points (16%)
Geekbench 2 - 32 Bit - Geekbench Floating Point
100%
1 N2910 +
2189 Points (4%)
Geekbench 2 - 32 Bit - Geekbench Integer
100%
1 N2910 +
2544 Points (5%)
Geekbench 2 - 32 Bit - Geekbench Total Score
100%
1 N2910 +
2205 Points (6%)

Average Benchmarks Intel Celeron N2910 → NAN% n=

- Range of benchmark values for this graphics card
- Average benchmark values for this graphics card
* 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), 2021, 2020
v1.16
log 18. 19:06:12

#0 checking url part for id 6007 +0s ... 0s

#1 checking url part for id 4576 +0s ... 0s

#2 not redirecting to Ajax server +0s ... 0s

#3 did not recreate cache, as it is less than 5 days old! Created at Wed, 15 Sep 2021 13:09:12 +0200 +0s ... 0s

#4 composed specs +0.011s ... 0.011s

#5 did output specs +0s ... 0.011s

#6 getting avg benchmarks for device 6007 +0s ... 0.012s

#7 got single benchmarks 6007 +0s ... 0.012s

#8 getting avg benchmarks for device 4576 +0s ... 0.012s

#9 got single benchmarks 4576 +0.006s ... 0.019s

#10 got avg benchmarks for devices +0s ... 0.019s

#11 min, max, avg, median took s +0.007s ... 0.026s

#12 return log +0.004s ... 0.03s

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)