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!

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Celeron N2830

Reasons to consider the
Intel Celeron N2830

Report a correction

CPUBoss is not aware of any important advantages of the Celeron N2830 vs the Atom Z3775.

Front view of Intel Atom Z3775

Reasons to consider the
Intel Atom Z3775

Report a correction

CPUBoss is not aware of any important advantages of the Atom Z3775 vs the Celeron N2830.

Benchmarks Real world tests of Celeron N2830 vs Atom Z3775

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 N2830
56,100 MB/s
Atom Z3775
381,000 MB/s

GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs


3D Mark 06 (CPU)

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs


Celeron N2830  vs
Atom Z3775 
Clock speed 2.16 GHz 1.47 GHz
Turbo clock speed 2.41 GHz 2.39 GHz
Cores Dual core Quad core
Socket type
BGA 1170
BGA 1380
Is unlocked No No


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

power consumption

TDP 7.5W 2W
Annual home energy cost 1.81 $/year 0.48 $/year
Performance per watt 6 pt/W 90.91 pt/W
Typical power consumption 6.09W 1.63W


Architecture FSB FSB
Number of links 1 1


Celeron N2830  vs
Atom Z3775 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 2 4
L2 cache 1 MB 2 MB
L2 cache per core 0.5 MB/core 0.5 MB/core
Manufacture process 22 nm 22 nm
Max CPUs 1 1
Voltage range 0.4 - 1.14V 0.4 - 1.14V
Operating temperature Unknown - 105°C Unknown - 90°C


Overclocked clock speed 2.4 GHz 2.27 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 2.17 GHz 1.47 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.4 GHz 2.27 GHz

integrated graphics

Label Intel® HD Graphics Intel® HD Graphics
GPU clock speed 313 MHz 311 MHz
Turbo clock speed 750 MHz 667 MHz

memory controller

Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Memory type
Channels Dual Channel Dual Channel
Supports ECC No No
Maximum bandwidth 12,800 MB/s 17,066.66 MB/s
Maximum memory size 8,192 MB 4,096 MB
Intel Celeron N2830
Report a correction
Intel Atom Z3775
Report a correction

Read more


Showing 4 comments.
It depends on your needs. If you want low power, no heat, and all day battery life, Atom is the way to go. If all you're doing is web surfing, which is actually what MOST people do, they work very well. When I ask customers what they use their computer for, they rattle off a list of things they do daily. Yet all of those tasks are performed in a browser. Max out the RAM, replace the HDD with SSD, and install Linux Mint xfce or Lubuntu. You'd be surprised how well they work for a very small investment. You can buy 32GB solid state drives for $30. RAM is also cheap if you don't already have some in a box. I always keep RAM, and I keep a few KingWin or other cheap Chinese SSDs around. Linux doesn't require much space. It comes with the Firefox browser, but you can easily install Chrome, Chromium, or Opera. I prefer Chromium. Now if you're a gamer, forget it. Neither of these processors will work. I also upgraded the NIC to a dual band. I use it for Wi-Fi site analysis. I love my little Netbook!
Not always. Look at the PassMark and other benchmark scores. A quad core Atom can beat a dual core Celeron. I have Netbooks with both. I run Linux Mint xfce on each, and I must say, they both perform quite well. Neither is a barn burner. A core i series could leave these in the dust. But the core i series costs a lot more, uses more power, produces more heat, and for some tasks really isn't that much faster. A customer gave me an Atom based netbook that she said was too slow to do anything. She said if I could use it, I could have it. I doubled the RAM, replaced the hard drive with an SSD, and installed Linux. Now I love this little guy! For general web surfing and light office work it's great! I even took a chance on it the other day and decided to try editing a photo with GIMP. I thought for sure that would choke it, but it worked very well.
agree ass but neither is goot actually thats like comparing 2x crap and deciding which smells more
celeron is much faster u idiots
comments powered by Disqus