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

Intel Celeron N2807

CPUBoss Winner
Front view of Intel Celeron N2807

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Celeron N2807

Reasons to consider the
Intel Celeron N2807

Report a correction
Much better geekbench 3 AES single core score 50,900 MB/s vs 33,800 MB/s More than 50% better geekbench 3 AES single core score
Much newer manufacturing process 22 nm vs 45 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
More advanced architecture x86-64 vs x86 A 64-bit architecture allows more RAM to be installed and accessed by the processor
More l2 cache 1 MB vs 0.5 MB 2x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Much better performance per watt 11.49 pt/W vs 6.07 pt/W Around 90% better performance per watt
Newer Feb, 2014 vs Sep, 2010 Release date over 3 years later
Better geekbench 3 Multi-Core score 1,447 vs 507 More than 2.8x better geekbench 3 Multi-Core score
Better overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.17 GHz vs 1.6 GHz More than 35% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
More cores 2 vs 1 Twice as many cores; run more applications at once
Better performance per dollar 0.46 pt/$ vs 0.37 pt/$ More than 25% better performance per dollar
Front view of Intel Atom E680

Reasons to consider the
Intel Atom E680

Report a correction
Higher GPU clock speed 400 MHz vs 313 MHz Around 30% higher GPU clock speed

Benchmarks Real world tests of Celeron N2807 vs Atom E680

GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Celeron N2807
50,900 MB/s
Atom E680
33,800 MB/s

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Celeron N2807  vs
Atom E680 
Clock speed 1.58 GHz 1.6 GHz
Cores Dual core Single core

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Supports trusted computing No No
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE2
MMX
SSE3
EM64T
SSE
Supplemental SSE3
AES
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

power consumption

TDP 4.3W 4.5W
Annual home energy cost 1.04 $/year 1.08 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 3.77 $/year 3.94 $/year
Performance per watt 11.49 pt/W 6.07 pt/W
Typical power consumption 3.49W 3.66W

bus

Architecture FSB FSB
Number of links 1 1

details

Celeron N2807  vs
Atom E680 
Architecture x86-64 x86
Threads 2 2
L2 cache 1 MB 0.5 MB
L2 cache per core 0.5 MB/core 0.5 MB/core
Manufacture process 22 nm 45 nm
Max CPUs 1 1
Voltage range 0.4 - 1.14V 0.75 - 0.9V

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 2.17 GHz 1.6 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 1.58 GHz 1.6 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.17 GHz 1.6 GHz

integrated graphics

GPU GPU GPU
Label Intel® HD Graphics Integrated
GPU clock speed 313 MHz 400 MHz

memory controller

Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Memory type
DDR3
DDR2-800
DDR2
Channels Single Channel Single Channel
Supports ECC No No
Maximum bandwidth 6,400 MB/s 6,400 MB/s
Maximum memory size 4,096 MB 2,048 MB
Intel Celeron N2807
Report a correction
Intel Atom E680
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus