CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of N2930 vs C2358 among all 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

7.8

CPUBoss Score

Combination of all six facets

Winner
Intel Atom C2358 

CPUBoss recommends the Intel Atom C2358  based on its power consumption and value.

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
Front view of Intel Atom C2358

Intel Atom C2358

CPUBoss Winner

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Celeron N2930

Reasons to consider the
Intel Celeron N2930

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
More cores 4 vs 2 Twice as many cores; run more applications at once
Better overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.16 GHz vs 1.7 GHz More than 25% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
More threads 4 vs 2 Twice as many threads
Slightly better performance per watt 7.05 pt/W vs 6.4 pt/W More than 10% better performance per watt
Newer Feb, 2014 vs Jul, 2013 Release date 7 months later
Better overclocked clock speed (Water) 2.16 GHz vs 1.7 GHz More than 25% better overclocked clock speed (Water)
Front view of Intel Atom C2358

Reasons to consider the
Intel Atom C2358

Report a correction
Significantly better performance per dollar 0.75 pt/$ vs 0.44 pt/$ Around 70% better performance per dollar

Benchmarks Real world tests of Celeron N2930 vs Atom C2358

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Celeron N2930  vs
Atom C2358 
Clock speed 1.83 GHz 1.7 GHz
Turbo clock speed 2.17 GHz 2 GHz
Cores Quad core Dual core

features

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

power consumption

TDP 7.5W 7W
Annual home energy cost 1.81 $/year 1.69 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 6.57 $/year 6.13 $/year
Performance per watt 7.05 pt/W 6.4 pt/W
Typical power consumption 6.09W 5.69W

bus

Architecture FSB FSB
Number of links 1 1

details

Celeron N2930  vs
Atom C2358 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 4 2
Manufacture process 22 nm 22 nm
Max CPUs 1 1

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 2.16 GHz 1.7 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 2.16 GHz 1.7 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.16 GHz 1.7 GHz

integrated graphics

GPU GPU None
Label Intel® HD Graphics N/A
Number of displays supported 2 N/A
GPU clock speed 313 MHz N/A
Turbo clock speed 854 MHz N/A

memory controller

Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Memory type
DDR3
Channels Dual Channel Single Channel
Supports ECC No Yes
Maximum bandwidth 12,800 MB/s 6,400 MB/s
Maximum memory size 8,192 MB 16,384 MB
Intel Celeron N2930
Report a correction
Intel Atom C2358
Report a correction

Read more

Comments

comments powered by Disqus