Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?

Thanks for adding your opinion. Follow us on Facebook to stay up to date with the latest news!
VS

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Celeron M 443

Reasons to consider the
Intel Celeron M 443

Report a correction

CPUBoss is not aware of any important advantages of the Celeron M 443 vs the Atom N2800.

Front view of Intel Atom N2800

Reasons to consider the
Intel Atom N2800

Report a correction
Has a built-in GPU Yes vs No Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes vs No Somewhat common; Allows for maximum performance when needed, while conserving power and minimizing heat production when not needed

Benchmarks Real world tests of Celeron M 443 vs Atom N2800

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Celeron M 443  vs
Atom N2800 
Clock speed 1.2 GHz 1.86 GHz
Cores Single core Dual core

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Supports trusted computing No No
Has virtualization support No No
Instruction set extensions
SSE2
MMX
SSE3
SSE
Supplemental SSE3
AES
Supports dynamic frequency scaling No Yes

power consumption

TDP 5.5W 6.5W
Annual home energy cost 1.32 $/year 1.57 $/year
Performance per watt 4.29 pt/W 5.28 pt/W
Typical power consumption 4.47W 5.28W

details

Celeron M 443  vs
Atom N2800 
Architecture x86 x86-64
Threads 1 4
L2 cache 1 MB 1 MB
L2 cache per core 1 MB/core 0.5 MB/core
Manufacture process 65 nm 32 nm
Max CPUs 1 1

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 1.33 GHz 1.87 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 1.2 GHz 1.87 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 1.33 GHz 1.87 GHz

integrated graphics

GPU None GPU
Label N/A Integrated
GPU clock speed N/A 640 MHz

bus

Architecture FSB DMI
Number of links 1 1
Intel Celeron M 443
Report a correction
Intel Atom N2800
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus