Atom N2800 vs Celeron J4105

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron J4105
2017
4 cores / 4 threads, 10 Watt
1.83
+554%
Atom N2800
2011
2 cores / 4 threads, 6 Watt
0.28

Celeron J4105 outperforms Atom N2800 by a whopping 554% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron J4105 and Atom N2800 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking20113134
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation2.08no data
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
SeriesIntel CeleronIntel Atom
Power efficiency17.323.79
Architecture codenameGoldmont Plus (2017)Cedarview-M (2011−2012)
Release date11 December 2017 (7 years ago)1 December 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$107$47

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron J4105 and Atom N2800 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads44
Base clock speed1.5 GHz1.86 GHz
Boost clock speed2.5 GHz1.87 GHz
Multiplier15no data
L1 cache56 KB (per core)64 KB (per core)
L2 cache4 MB (shared)512K (per core)
L3 cache4 MB0 KB
Chip lithography14 nm32 nm
Die size93 mm266 mm2
Maximum core temperature105 °Cno data
Number of transistorsno data176 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility+-

Compatibility

Information on Celeron J4105 and Atom N2800 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 configuration1 (Uniprocessor)1
SocketFCBGA1090FCBGA559
Power consumption (TDP)10 Watt6.5 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron J4105 and Atom N2800. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.2Intel® SSE2, Intel® SSE3, Intel® SSSE3
AES-NI+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Speed Shift-no data
Turbo Boost Technology--
Hyper-Threading Technology-+
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring++
Smart Response-no data
Demand Based Switchingno data-
GPIO+no data
Turbo Boost Max 3.0-no data

Security technologies

Celeron J4105 and Atom N2800 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
EDB++
Secure Key+no data
MPX+-
Identity Protection+-
SGXYes with Intel® MEno data
OS Guard+no data
Anti-Theft-no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron J4105 and Atom N2800 are enumerated here.

VT-d+-
VT-x+-
EPT+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron J4105 and Atom N2800. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4DDR3
Maximum memory size8 GB4.88 GB
Max memory channels21
Maximum memory bandwidth38.397 GB/sno data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Intel UHD Graphics 600Intel Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 3650 (640 MHz)
Max video memory8 GBno data
Quick Sync Video+-
Graphics max frequency750 MHzno data
Execution Units12no data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron J4105 and Atom N2800 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported3no data
eDP+no data
DisplayPort+-
HDMI+-
MIPI-DSI+no data

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by Celeron J4105 and Atom N2800 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

4K resolution support+no data

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Celeron J4105 and Atom N2800 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectX12no data
OpenGL4.4no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron J4105 and Atom N2800.

PCIe version2.0no data
PCI Express lanes6no data
USB revision2.0/3.0no data
Total number of SATA ports2no data
Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Ports2no data
Number of USB ports8no data
Integrated LAN-no data
UART+no data

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

Celeron J4105 1.83
+554%
Atom N2800 0.28

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.

Celeron J4105 2899
+553%
Atom N2800 444

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.83 0.28
Recency 11 December 2017 1 December 2011
Physical cores 4 2
Chip lithography 14 nm 32 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 10 Watt 6 Watt

Celeron J4105 has a 553.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, 100% more physical cores, and a 128.6% more advanced lithography process.

Atom N2800, on the other hand, has 66.7% lower power consumption.

The Celeron J4105 is our recommended choice as it beats the Atom N2800 in performance tests.

Note that Celeron J4105 is a desktop processor while Atom N2800 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron J4105 and Atom N2800, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


Intel Celeron J4105
Celeron J4105
Intel Atom N2800
Atom N2800

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.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


3.3 311 votes

Rate Celeron J4105 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.7 104 votes

Rate Atom N2800 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron J4105 or Atom N2800, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.