Processor N200 vs Celeron N6211

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron N6211
2022
2 cores / 2 threads, 6 Watt
1.47
Processor N200
2023
4 cores / 4 threads, 6 Watt
1.62
+10.2%

Processor N200 outperforms Celeron N6211 by a moderate 10% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron N6211 and Processor N200 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking21912100
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.33no data
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
SeriesElkhart LakeIntel Alder Lake-N
Power efficiency20.6224.62
Architecture codenameElkhart Lake (2022)Alder Lake-N (2023)
Release date17 July 2022 (2 years ago)3 January 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$54$193

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron N6211 and Processor N200 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)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads24
Base clock speed1.2 GHz0.1 GHz
Boost clock speed3 GHz3.7 GHz
L1 cacheno data96 KB (per core)
L2 cache1.5 MB2 MB (shared)
L3 cacheno data6 MB (shared)
Chip lithography10 nm10 nm
Maximum core temperature70 °C105 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility++

Compatibility

Information on Celeron N6211 and Processor N200 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
SocketBGA1493Intel BGA 1264
Power consumption (TDP)6.5 Watt6 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron N6211 and Processor N200. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI++
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++

Security technologies

Celeron N6211 and Processor N200 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron N6211 and Processor N200 are enumerated here.

VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron N6211 and Processor N200. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4DDR4, DDR5 4800 MHz Single-channel

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Intel UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 16 EU)Intel UHD Graphics Xe 750 32EUs (Rocket Lake)

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron N6211 and Processor N200.

PCIe versionno data3.0
PCI Express lanesno data9

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 1.47
Processor N200 1.62
+10.2%

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 N6211 2696
Processor N200 3937
+46%

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

Celeron N6211 4693
Processor N200 7549
+60.9%

wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

Celeron N6211 49.66
Processor N200 25.99
+91.1%

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.

Celeron N6211 2
Processor N200 3
+65.5%

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.

Celeron N6211 128
Processor N200 219
+71.1%

Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R15 (standing for Release 15) is a benchmark made by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version (sometimes called Single-Thread) only uses a single processor thread to render a room full of reflective spheres and light sources.

Celeron N6211 76
Processor N200 113
+48.7%

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R11.5 is an old benchmark by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version loads a single thread with ray tracing to render a glossy room full of crystal spheres and light sources.

Celeron N6211 0.97
Processor N200 1.36
+40.2%

TrueCrypt AES

TrueCrypt is a discontinued piece of software that was widely used for on-the-fly-encryption of disk partitions, now superseded by VeraCrypt. It contains several embedded performance tests, one of them being TrueCrypt AES, which measures data encryption speed using AES algorithm. Result is encryption speed in gigabytes per second.

Celeron N6211 1
Processor N200 3.2
+227%

x264 encoding pass 2

x264 Pass 2 is a slower variant of x264 video compression that produces a variable bit rate output file, which results in better quality since the higher bit rate is used when it is needed more. Benchmark result is still measured in frames per second.  

Celeron N6211 10
Processor N200 16
+63%

x264 encoding pass 1

x264 version 4.0 is a video encoding benchmark uses MPEG 4 x264 compression method to compress a sample HD (720p) video. Pass 1 is a faster variant that produces a constant bit rate output file. Its result is measured in frames per second, which means how many frames of the source video file were encoded per second.  

Celeron N6211 45
Processor N200 80
+76.7%

WinRAR 4.0

WinRAR 4.0 is an outdated version of a popular file archiver. It contains an internal speed test, using 'Best' setting of RAR compression on large chunks of randomly generated data. Its results are measured in kilobytes per second.

Celeron N6211 731
Processor N200 2115
+189%

Geekbench 5.5 Multi-Core

Celeron N6211 844
Processor N200 1540
+82.5%

Blender(-)

Celeron N6211 3767
+75.2%
Processor N200 2150

Geekbench 5.5 Single-Core

Celeron N6211 556
Processor N200 928
+66.9%

7-Zip Single

Celeron N6211 2593
Processor N200 3230
+24.6%

7-Zip

Celeron N6211 3974
Processor N200 7146
+79.8%

WebXPRT 3

Celeron N6211 89
Processor N200 171
+92%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.47 1.62
Integrated graphics card 1.39 3.29
Recency 17 July 2022 3 January 2023
Physical cores 2 4
Threads 2 4

Processor N200 has a 10.2% higher aggregate performance score, 136.7% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 5 months, and 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.

The Processor N200 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron N6211 in performance tests.

Note that Celeron N6211 is a desktop processor while Processor N200 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron N6211 and Processor N200, 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 Processor N200
Processor N200

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
3.2 141 vote

Rate Processor N200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron N6211 or Processor N200, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.