CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of N2830 vs 1005M among laptop CPUs

Performance

Benchmark performance using all cores

PCMark 8 Home 3.0 Accelerated, PassMark and 1 more

Single-core Performance

Individual core benchmark performance

PassMark (Single Core), Geekbench 3 Single Core and 1 more

Integrated Graphics

Integrated GPU performance for graphics

Sky Diver and Cloud Gate

Integrated Graphics (OpenCL)

Integrated GPU performance for parallel computing

CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 4 more

Performance per Watt

How efficiently does the processor use electricity?

Sky Diver, Cloud Gate, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more

Value

Are you paying a premium for performance?

Sky Diver, Cloud Gate, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more

3.7

CPUBoss Score

Combination of all six facets

Winner
Intel Celeron N2830 

CPUBoss recommends the Intel Celeron N2830  based on its .

See full details

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 N2830

Reasons to consider the
Intel Celeron N2830

Report a correction

CPUBoss is not aware of any important advantages of the N2830 vs the 1005M.

Front view of Intel Celeron 1005M

Reasons to consider the
Intel Celeron 1005M

Report a correction

CPUBoss is not aware of any important advantages of the 1005M vs the N2830.

Benchmarks Real world tests of Celeron N2830 vs 1005M

CompuBench 1.5 (Bitcoin mining) Data courtesy CompuBench

Celeron N2830
1.57 mHash/s
Celeron 1005M
3.35 mHash/s

CompuBench 1.5 (Face detection)

Celeron N2830
1.08 mPixels/s
Celeron 1005M
4.1 mPixels/s

CompuBench 1.5 (T-Rex) Data courtesy CompuBench

Celeron N2830
0.12 fps
Celeron 1005M
0.44 fps

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
Celeron 1005M
99,700 MB/s

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Celeron N2830  vs
1005M 
Clock speed 2.16 GHz 1.9 GHz
Cores Dual core Dual core

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Supports trusted computing No No
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE2
F16C
MMX
SSE4
AVX
SSE3
EM64T
SSE
SSE4.1
SSE4.2
Supplemental SSE3
AES
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

power consumption

TDP 7.5W 35W
Annual home energy cost 1.81 $/year 8.43 $/year
Performance per watt 6 pt/W 2.55 pt/W
Typical power consumption 6.09W 28.44W

bus

Architecture FSB DMI
Number of links 1 1

details

Celeron N2830  vs
1005M 
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
Operating temperature Unknown - 105°C Unknown - 105°C

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 2.4 GHz 1.9 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 2.17 GHz 1.9 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.4 GHz 1.9 GHz

integrated graphics

GPU GPU GPU
Label Intel® HD Graphics Intel® HD Graphics
Number of displays supported 2 3
GPU clock speed 313 MHz 650 MHz
Turbo clock speed 750 MHz 1,000 MHz

memory controller

Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Memory type
DDR3-1600
DDR3L-1600
DDR3-1333
DDR3L-1333
DDR3RS-1600
DDR3RS-1333
Channels Dual Channel Dual Channel
Supports ECC No No
Maximum bandwidth 12,800 MB/s 25,600 MB/s
Maximum memory size 8,192 MB 32,768 MB
Intel Celeron N2830
Report a correction
Intel Celeron 1005M
Report a correction

Read more

Comments

Showing 5 comments.
the N2830 is much weaker then the 1005M i use the 1005M laptop and my dad got the N2830 the 1005M are taken much more force with games and give much better FPS the N2830 can barely run old games
How? Look all benchmarks n2830 lose on all of them! 1005m is much better!
celeron 1005M have 2mb cache !
Wrong Power Consumption For 1005M
n2830 is better
comments powered by Disqus