Pentium G2020 vs Celeron N6211

VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron N6211
2022
2 cores / 2 threads, 6 Watt
1.44
+33.3%
Pentium G2020
2013
2 cores / 2 threads, 55 Watt
1.08

Celeron N6211 outperforms Pentium G2020 by a substantial 33% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron N6211 and Pentium G2020 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking21972414
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.330.04
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
SeriesElkhart Lakeno data
Power efficiency20.581.82
Architecture codenameElkhart Lake (2022)Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)
Release date17 July 2022 (2 years ago)21 January 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$54$60

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Celeron N6211 has 8225% better value for money than Pentium G2020.

Detailed specifications

Celeron N6211 and Pentium G2020 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 speed1.2 GHz2.9 GHz
Boost clock speed3 GHz2.9 GHz
Bus rateno data5 GT/s
L1 cacheno data64 KB (per core)
L2 cache1.5 MB256 KB (per core)
L3 cacheno data3072 KB (shared)
Chip lithography10 nm22 nm
Die sizeno data94 mm2
Maximum core temperature70 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data65 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility+-

Compatibility

Information on Celeron N6211 and Pentium G2020 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 configurationno data1
SocketBGA1493FCLGA1155
Power consumption (TDP)6.5 Watt55 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron N6211 and Pentium G2020. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2
AES-NI+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
My WiFino data-
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+

Security technologies

Celeron N6211 and Pentium G2020 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
EDBno data+
Secure Keyno data-
Anti-Theftno data-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron N6211 and Pentium G2020 are enumerated here.

VT-dno data-
VT-xno data+
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron N6211 and Pentium G2020. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4DDR3
Maximum memory sizeno data32 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
Maximum memory bandwidthno data21 GB/s
ECC memory support-+

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 16 EU)Intel® HD Graphics for 3rd Generation Intel® Processors
Graphics max frequencyno data1.05 GHz

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron N6211 and Pentium G2020 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data3

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron N6211 and Pentium G2020.

PCIe versionno data2.0

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 N6211 1.44
+33.3%
Pentium G2020 1.08

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 N6211 2245
+32.8%
Pentium G2020 1690

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.44 1.08
Recency 17 July 2022 21 January 2013
Chip lithography 10 nm 22 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 6 Watt 55 Watt

Celeron N6211 has a 33.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 120% more advanced lithography process, and 816.7% lower power consumption.

The Celeron N6211 is our recommended choice as it beats the Pentium G2020 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron N6211 and Pentium G2020, 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 N6211
Celeron N6211
Intel Pentium G2020
Pentium G2020

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.


2.3 4 votes

Rate Celeron N6211 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 632 votes

Rate Pentium G2020 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron N6211 or Pentium G2020, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.