GX-210JA vs Celeron N2807

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron N2807
2014
2 cores / 2 threads, 4 Watt
0.31
+93.8%
GX-210JA
2013
2 cores / 2 threads, 6 Watt
0.16

Celeron N2807 outperforms GX-210JA by an impressive 94% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron N2807 and GX-210JA processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking31093306
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel CeleronAMD
Power efficiency7.332.52
Architecture codenameBay Trail-M (2013−2014)Temash (2013)
Release date23 February 2014 (10 years ago)23 May 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$107no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron N2807 and GX-210JA 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 cores2 (Dual-core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads22
Base clock speed1.58 GHzno data
Boost clock speed2.16 GHz1 GHz
L1 cache56K (per core)128 KB
L2 cache512K (per core)1 MB
L3 cache0 KBno data
Chip lithography22 nm28 nm
Maximum core temperature105 °Cno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Celeron N2807 and GX-210JA 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 configuration1no data
SocketFCBGA1170FT3 BGA
Power consumption (TDP)4.3 Watt6 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron N2807 and GX-210JA. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno data86x SSE (1, 2, 3, 3S, 4.1, 4.2, 4A),-64, AES, AVX
AES-NI-+
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
Idle States+no data
Smart Connect+no data
RST-no data

Security technologies

Celeron N2807 and GX-210JA technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

EDB+no data
Secure Key+no data
Anti-Theft-no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron N2807 and GX-210JA are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron N2807 and GX-210JA. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3
Maximum memory size4 GBno data
Max memory channels1no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel HD Graphics for Intel Atom Processor Z3700 Seriesno data
Quick Sync Video+-
Graphics max frequency750 MHzno data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron N2807 and GX-210JA integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported2no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron N2807 and GX-210JA.

PCIe version2.0no data
PCI Express lanes4no data
USB revision3.0 and 2.0no data
Total number of SATA ports2no data
Number of USB ports5no 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 N2807 0.31
+93.8%
GX-210JA 0.16

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 N2807 486
+96%
GX-210JA 248

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.31 0.16
Recency 23 February 2014 23 May 2013
Chip lithography 22 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 4 Watt 6 Watt

Celeron N2807 has a 93.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 months, a 27.3% more advanced lithography process, and 50% lower power consumption.

The Celeron N2807 is our recommended choice as it beats the GX-210JA in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron N2807 and GX-210JA, 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 N2807
Celeron N2807
AMD GX-210JA
GX-210JA

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.


2.4 36 votes

Rate Celeron N2807 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.5 4 votes

Rate GX-210JA on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron N2807 or GX-210JA, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.