Processor N50 vs Celeron 2.0
Primary details
Comparing Celeron 2.0 and Processor N50 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | 2022 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Power efficiency | no data | 27.60 |
| Architecture codename | Northwood (2002−2004) | Alder Lake-N (2023) |
| Release date | September 2002 (22 years ago) | 3 January 2023 (1 year ago) |
Detailed specifications
Celeron 2.0 and Processor N50 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 | 1 (Single-Core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 1 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 1 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2 GHz | 3.4 GHz |
| L1 cache | 8 KB | 96 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 128 KB | 2 MB (shared) |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 6 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 130 nm | 10 nm |
| Die size | 146 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 105 °C |
| Number of transistors | 55 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | - | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron 2.0 and Processor N50 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 | 1 | 1 |
| Socket | 478 | Intel BGA 1264 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 73 Watt | 6 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 2.0 and Processor N50. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
Security technologies
Celeron 2.0 and Processor N50 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron 2.0 and Processor N50 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron 2.0 and Processor N50. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR1, DDR2 | DDR4, DDR5 4800 MHz Single-channel |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | Intel UHD Graphics Xe 16EUs (Tiger Lake-H) |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron 2.0 and Processor N50.
| PCIe version | no data | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 9 |
Pros & cons summary
| Physical cores | 1 | 2 |
| Threads | 1 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 130 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 73 Watt | 6 Watt |
Processor N50 has 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, a 1200% more advanced lithography process, and 1116.7% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Celeron 2.0 and Processor N50. We've got no test results to judge.
Note that Celeron 2.0 is a desktop processor while Processor N50 is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron 2.0 and Processor N50, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Similar processor comparisons
We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.
