Atom N2800 vs Core 2 Quad Q8400
Primary details
Comparing Core 2 Quad Q8400 and Atom N2800 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2268 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | no data | Intel Atom |
| Power efficiency | 1.30 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Yorkfield (2007−2009) | Cedarview-M (2011−2012) |
| Release date | 19 April 2009 (15 years ago) | 1 December 2011 (12 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $47 |
Detailed specifications
Core 2 Quad Q8400 and Atom N2800 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 | 4 (Quad-Core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 4 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 2.66 GHz | 1.86 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 0.67 GHz | 1.87 GHz |
| Bus rate | 1333 MHz | no data |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 64 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 4 MB (shared) | 512K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 32 nm |
| Die size | 2x 82 mm2 | 66 mm2 |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 71 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 456 million | 176 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| VID voltage range | 0.85V-1.3625V | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Core 2 Quad Q8400 and Atom N2800 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 configuration | 1 | 1 |
| Socket | FCLGA775,LGA775 | FCBGA559 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 6.5 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Quad Q8400 and Atom N2800. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | Intel® SSE2, Intel® SSE3, Intel® SSSE3 |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | + |
| Idle States | + | no data |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | + |
| Demand Based Switching | - | - |
| FSB parity | - | no data |
Security technologies
Core 2 Quad Q8400 and Atom N2800 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | - | - |
| EDB | + | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core 2 Quad Q8400 and Atom N2800 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | no data | - |
| VT-x | + | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core 2 Quad Q8400 and Atom N2800. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR1, DDR2, DDR3 | DDR3 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 4.88 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 1 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) | Intel Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 3650 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core 2 Quad Q8400 and Atom N2800.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | no 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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 19 April 2009 | 1 December 2011 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 32 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 6 Watt |
Core 2 Quad Q8400 has 100% more physical cores.
Atom N2800, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, a 40.6% more advanced lithography process, and 1483.3% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Core 2 Quad Q8400 and Atom N2800. We've got no test results to judge.
Note that Core 2 Quad Q8400 is a desktop processor while Atom N2800 is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Quad Q8400 and Atom N2800, 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.
