Celeron N2840 vs i7-2820QM

VS

Primary details

Comparing Core i7-2820QM and Celeron N2840 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking1680not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel Core i7Intel Celeron
Power efficiency5.80no data
Architecture codenameSandy Bridge (2011−2013)Bay Trail-M (2013−2014)
Release date3 January 2011 (13 years ago)22 May 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$568no data

Detailed specifications

Core i7-2820QM and Celeron N2840 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads82
Base clock speed2.3 GHz2.16 GHz
Boost clock speed3.4 GHz2.58 GHz
Bus typeDMI 2.0no data
Bus rate4 × 5 GT/sno data
Multiplier23no data
L1 cache64K (per core)56K (per core)
L2 cache256K (per core)512K (per core)
L3 cache8 MB (shared)0 KB
Chip lithography32 nm22 nm
Die size216 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature100 °C100 °C
Number of transistors1,160 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Core i7-2820QM and Celeron N2840 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 configuration1 (Uniprocessor)1
SocketFCBGA1224,FCPGA988,PPGA988FCBGA1170
Power consumption (TDP)45 Watt7.5 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i7-2820QM and Celeron N2840. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® AVXno data
AES-NI+-
FMA+-
AVX+-
vPro+no data
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
My WiFi+no data
Turbo Boost Technology2.0-
Hyper-Threading Technology+-
Idle States++
Thermal Monitoring+-
Flex Memory Access+no data
Demand Based Switching-no data
Smart Connectno data+
FDI+no data
Fast Memory Access+no data

Security technologies

Core i7-2820QM and Celeron N2840 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+no data
EDB++
Secure Keyno data+
Identity Protection+-
Anti-Theft+-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i7-2820QM and Celeron N2840 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-d+-
VT-x++
EPT+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i7-2820QM and Celeron N2840. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3-1066, DDR3-1333, DDR3-1600DDR3
Maximum memory size32 GB8 GB
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidth25.598 GB/s21.32 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel HD Graphics 3000Intel® HD Graphics for Intel Atom® Processor Z3700 Series
Quick Sync Video++
Clear Video HD+-
Graphics max frequency1.3 GHz792 MHz
InTru 3D+-

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Core i7-2820QM and Celeron N2840 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported22
eDP+no data
DisplayPort+-
HDMI+-
SDVO+no data
CRT+no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i7-2820QM and Celeron N2840.

PCIe version2.02.0
PCI Express lanes164
USB revisionno data3.0 and 2.0
Total number of SATA portsno data2
Number of USB portsno data5

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.

i7-2820QM 4381
+646%
Celeron N2840 587

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

i7-2820QM 517
+190%
Celeron N2840 178

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

i7-2820QM 1622
+446%
Celeron N2840 297

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.

i7-2820QM 4250
+219%
Celeron N2840 1331

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.

i7-2820QM 15044
+494%
Celeron N2840 2533

3DMark06 CPU

3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.

i7-2820QM 5819
+285%
Celeron N2840 1510

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.

i7-2820QM 5
+516%
Celeron N2840 1

Pros & cons summary


Recency 3 January 2011 22 May 2014
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 8 2
Chip lithography 32 nm 22 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 45 Watt 7 Watt

i7-2820QM has 100% more physical cores and 300% more threads.

Celeron N2840, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, a 45.5% more advanced lithography process, and 542.9% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Core i7-2820QM and Celeron N2840. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core i7-2820QM and Celeron N2840, 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 Core i7-2820QM
Core i7-2820QM
Intel Celeron N2840
Celeron N2840

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.


4.1 162 votes

Rate Core i7-2820QM on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.7 628 votes

Rate Celeron N2840 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core i7-2820QM or Celeron N2840, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.