Atom C3958 vs Celeron N2815
Aggregate performance score
Atom C3958 outperforms Celeron N2815 by a whopping 693% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 3370 | 2006 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.01 | 0.17 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Server |
| Series | Intel Celeron | Intel Atom |
| Power efficiency | 1.59 | 3.05 |
| Designer | Intel | Intel |
| Architecture codename | Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) | Goldmont (2016−2017) |
| Release date | 1 December 2013 (11 years ago) | 15 August 2017 (8 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $107 | $449 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Atom C3958 has 1600% better value for money than Celeron N2815.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
Celeron N2815 and Atom C3958 basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.
| Physical cores | 2 (Dual-core) | 16 (Hexadeca-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 16 |
| Base clock speed | 1.86 GHz | 2 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.13 GHz | 2 GHz |
| Multiplier | no data | 20 |
| L1 cache | 112 KB | 896 KB |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 16 MB |
| L3 cache | 1 MB | 16 MB |
| Chip lithography | 22 nm | 14 nm |
| Maximum core temperature | 105 °C | 83 °C |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron N2815 and Atom C3958 compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.
| Number of CPUs in a configuration | no data | 1 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | FCBGA1170 | FCBGA1310 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 7.5 Watt | 31 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron N2815 and Atom C3958. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| QuickAssist | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | - |
| Idle States | + | no data |
| Smart Connect | + | no data |
| RST | - | no data |
Security technologies
Celeron N2815 and Atom C3958 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| EDB | + | + |
| Secure Boot | no data | + |
| SGX | no data | - |
| OS Guard | no data | + |
| Anti-Theft | - | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron N2815 and Atom C3958 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | - | + |
| VT-x | + | + |
| EPT | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron N2815 and Atom C3958. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3L-1066 | DDR4: 2400 |
| Maximum memory size | 8 GB | 256 GB |
| Max memory channels | 2 | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 38.397 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Intel HD Graphics for Intel Atom Processor Z3700 Series | no data |
| Graphics max frequency | 756 MHz | no data |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Celeron N2815 and Atom C3958 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | 2 | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron N2815 and Atom C3958.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | 3 |
| PCI Express lanes | 4 | 16 |
| USB revision | 3.0 and 2.0 | 3 |
| Total number of SATA ports | 2 | 16 |
| Number of USB ports | 5 | 8 |
| Integrated LAN | no data | 4x10/2.5/1 GBE |
Synthetic benchmarks
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance rating.
Passmark
Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.28 | 2.22 |
| Recency | 1 December 2013 | 15 August 2017 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 16 |
| Threads | 2 | 16 |
| Chip lithography | 22 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 7 Watt | 31 Watt |
Celeron N2815 has 342.9% lower power consumption.
Atom C3958, on the other hand, has a 692.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, 700% more physical cores and 700% more threads, and a 57.1% more advanced lithography process.
The Intel Atom C3958 is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Celeron N2815 in performance tests.
Be aware that Celeron N2815 is a notebook processor while Atom C3958 is a server/workstation one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
