Iris Pro Graphics 580 vs Celeron N2815
Primary details
Comparing Celeron N2815 and Iris Pro Graphics 580 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
Place in the ranking | not rated | not rated |
Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
Series | Intel Celeron | Intel Iris Graphics |
Architecture codename | Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) | Gen9 |
Release date | 1 December 2013 (10 years ago) | no data (2024 years ago) |
Launch price (MSRP) | $107 | no data |
Detailed specifications
Celeron N2815 and Iris Pro Graphics 580 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) | no data |
Threads | 2 | no data |
Base clock speed | 1.86 GHz | no data |
Boost clock speed | 2.13 GHz | 0.35 GHz |
L1 cache | 112 KB | no data |
L2 cache | 1 MB | no data |
L3 cache | 1 MB | no data |
Chip lithography | 22 nm | 14 nm0.014 μm 1.4e-5 mm |
Maximum core temperature | 105 °C | no data |
64 bit support | + | - |
Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron N2815 and Iris Pro Graphics 580 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.
Socket | FCBGA1170 | no data |
Power consumption (TDP) | 7.5 Watt | no data |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron N2815 and Iris Pro Graphics 580. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
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 N2815 and Iris Pro Graphics 580 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
EDB | + | no data |
Anti-Theft | - | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron N2815 and Iris Pro Graphics 580 are enumerated here.
VT-d | - | no data |
VT-x | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron N2815 and Iris Pro Graphics 580. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
Supported memory types | DDR3L-1066 | no data |
Maximum memory size | 8 GB | 65,536 MB 67,108,864 KB 68,719,476,736 B 0.0625 TiB 64 GB |
Max memory channels | 2 | no data |
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 Iris Pro Graphics 580 integrated GPUs.
Number of displays supported | 2 | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron N2815 and Iris Pro Graphics 580.
PCIe version | 2.0 | no data |
PCI Express lanes | 4 | no data |
USB revision | 3.0 and 2.0 | no data |
Total number of SATA ports | 2 | no data |
Number of USB ports | 5 | no data |
Pros & cons summary
Chip lithography | 22 nm | 14 nm |
Iris Pro Graphics 580 has a 57.1% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Celeron N2815 and Iris Pro Graphics 580. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron N2815 and Iris Pro Graphics 580, 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.