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 N3150

CPUBoss Winner
Front view of Intel Celeron N3150

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Celeron N3150

Reasons to consider the
Intel Celeron N3150

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
Significantly newer manufacturing process 14 nm vs 22 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Much better performance per watt 10.68 pt/W vs 5.5 pt/W Around 95% better performance per watt
More cores 4 vs 2 Twice as many cores; run more applications at once
More threads 4 vs 2 Twice as many threads
Newer Jan, 2015 vs Jul, 2013 Release date over 1 years later
Front view of Intel Atom C2338

Reasons to consider the
Intel Atom C2338

Report a correction
Slightly higher clock speed 1.7 GHz vs 1.6 GHz More than 5% higher clock speed
Slightly better performance per dollar 0.64 pt/$ vs 0.6 pt/$ More than 5% better performance per dollar
Slightly better overclocked clock speed (Water) 1.7 GHz vs 1.6 GHz More than 5% better overclocked clock speed (Water)

Benchmarks Real world tests of Celeron N3150 vs Atom C2338

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Celeron N3150  vs
Atom C2338 
Clock speed 1.6 GHz 1.7 GHz
Turbo clock speed 2.08 GHz 2 GHz
Cores Quad core Dual core

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
AES
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes No

power consumption

TDP 6W 7W
Annual home energy cost 1.45 $/year 1.69 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 5.26 $/year 6.13 $/year
Performance per watt 10.68 pt/W 5.5 pt/W
Typical power consumption 4.88W 5.69W

bus

Architecture FSB FSB
Number of links 1 1

details

Celeron N3150  vs
Atom C2338 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 4 2
Manufacture process 14 nm 22 nm
Max CPUs 1 1

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 1.75 GHz 1.7 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 1.6 GHz 1.7 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 1.75 GHz 1.7 GHz

integrated graphics

GPU GPU None
Label Intel® HD Graphics N/A
Number of displays supported 3 N/A
GPU clock speed 320 MHz N/A

memory controller

Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Memory type
DDR3L-1600
DDR3
Channels Dual Channel Single Channel
Supports ECC No Yes
Maximum bandwidth 25,600 MB/s 6,400 MB/s
Maximum memory size 8,192 MB 16,384 MB
Intel Celeron N3150
Report a correction
Intel Atom C2338
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus