Celeron N2815 vs M 900

Primary details

Comparing Celeron M 900 and Celeron N2815 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the rankingnot ratednot rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel Celeron MIntel Celeron
Architecture codenamePenryn (2008−2011)Bay Trail-M (2013−2014)
Release date1 April 2009 (15 years ago)1 December 2013 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$70$107

Detailed specifications

Celeron M 900 and Celeron N2815 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 cores1 (Single-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads12
Base clock speedno data1.86 GHz
Boost clock speed2.2 GHz2.13 GHz
Bus rate800 MHzno data
L1 cacheno data112 KB
L2 cache1 MB1 MB
L3 cacheno data1 MB
Chip lithography45 nm22 nm
Die size107 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature105 °C105 °C
Number of transistors410 Millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Celeron M 900 and Celeron N2815 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.

SocketPGA478FCBGA1170
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt7.5 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M 900 and Celeron N2815. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data+
Smart Connectno data+
RSTno data-

Security technologies

Celeron M 900 and Celeron N2815 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

EDBno data+
Anti-Theftno data-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron M 900 and Celeron N2815 are enumerated here.

VT-dno data-
VT-xno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron M 900 and Celeron N2815. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR3L-1066
Maximum memory sizeno data8 GB
Max memory channelsno data2

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataIntel® HD Graphics for Intel Atom® Processor Z3700 Series
Graphics max frequencyno data756 MHz

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron M 900 and Celeron N2815 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data2

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron M 900 and Celeron N2815.

PCIe versionno data2.0
PCI Express lanesno data4
USB revisionno data3.0 and 2.0
Total number of SATA portsno data2
Number of USB portsno data5

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.



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 M 900 123
Celeron N2815 492
+300%

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

Celeron M 900 2101
+96.7%
Celeron N2815 1068

Pros & cons summary


Recency 1 April 2009 1 December 2013
Physical cores 1 2
Threads 1 2
Chip lithography 45 nm 22 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 7 Watt

Celeron N2815 has an age advantage of 4 years, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, a 104.5% more advanced lithography process, and 400% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Celeron M 900 and Celeron N2815. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M 900 and Celeron N2815, 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 M 900
Celeron M 900
Intel Celeron N2815
Celeron N2815

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.


2.8 21 vote

Rate Celeron M 900 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 40 votes

Rate Celeron N2815 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron M 900 or Celeron N2815, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.