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 N2810

Reasons to consider the
Intel Celeron N2810

Report a correction
Higher clock speed 2 GHz vs 1.5 GHz Around 35% higher clock speed
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
More l2 cache per core 0.5 MB/core vs 0.25 MB/core 2x more l2 cache per core
Lower typical power consumption 6.09W vs 13.81W 2.3x lower typical power consumption
Better performance per watt 6.65 pt/W vs 4.38 pt/W More than 50% better performance per watt
Better overclocked clock speed (Air) 2 GHz vs 1.5 GHz Around 35% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Better overclocked clock speed (Water) 2 GHz vs 1.5 GHz Around 35% better overclocked clock speed (Water)
Newer Jul, 2013 vs Jan, 2013 Release date 5 months later
Lower annual home energy cost 1.81 $/year vs 4.1 $/year 2.3x lower annual home energy cost
Lower annual commercial energy cost 6.57 $/year vs 14.89 $/year 2.3x lower annual commercial energy cost
Front view of Intel Celeron 1007U

Reasons to consider the
Intel Celeron 1007U

Report a correction
Much better geekbench 3 AES single core score 78,500 MB/s vs 46,800 MB/s Around 70% better geekbench 3 AES single core score
Much better turbo clock speed 1,000 MHz vs 756 MHz More than 30% better turbo clock speed
Much better performance per dollar 0.99 pt/$ vs 0.47 pt/$ Around 2.2x better performance per dollar
More number of displays supported 3 vs 2 1 more number of displays supported
Better 3DMark06 CPU score 17.4 vs 17.2 Almost the same
Slightly higher GPU clock speed 350 MHz vs 313 MHz More than 10% higher GPU clock speed

Benchmarks Real world tests of Celeron N2810 vs 1007U

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 N2810
46,800 MB/s
Celeron 1007U
78,500 MB/s

GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench

3D Mark 06 (CPU)

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Celeron N2810  vs
1007U 
Clock speed 2 GHz 1.5 GHz
Cores Dual core Dual core

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

integrated graphics

GPU GPU GPU
Label Intel® HD Graphics Intel® HD Graphics
Number of displays supported 2 3
GPU clock speed 313 MHz 350 MHz
Turbo clock speed 756 MHz 1,000 MHz

memory controller

Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Memory type
DDR3
Channels Dual Channel Dual Channel
Maximum bandwidth 12,800 MB/s 12,800 MB/s
Maximum memory size 8,192 MB 32,768 MB

details

Celeron N2810  vs
1007U 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 2 2
L2 cache 1 MB 0.5 MB
L2 cache per core 0.5 MB/core 0.25 MB/core
Manufacture process 22 nm 22 nm
Max CPUs 1 1

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 2 GHz 1.5 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 2 GHz 1.5 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 2 GHz 1.5 GHz

power consumption

TDP 7.5W 17W
Annual home energy cost 1.81 $/year 4.1 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 6.57 $/year 14.89 $/year
Performance per watt 6.65 pt/W 4.38 pt/W
Typical power consumption 6.09W 13.81W

bus

Architecture FSB DMI
Number of links 1 1
Intel Celeron N2810
Report a correction
Intel Celeron 1007U
Report a correction

Read more

Comments

comments powered by Disqus