Celeron N2840 vs E2-9010

VS

Aggregate performance score

E2-9010
2016
2 cores / 2 threads, 10 Watt
0.69
+86.5%
Celeron N2840
2014
2 cores / 2 threads, 7 Watt
0.37

E2-9010 outperforms Celeron N2840 by an impressive 86% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing E2-9010 and Celeron N2840 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking27283041
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD Bristol RidgeIntel Celeron
Power efficiency4.355.00
Architecture codenameStoney Ridge (2016−2019)Bay Trail-M (2013−2014)
Release date1 June 2016 (8 years ago)22 May 2014 (10 years ago)

Detailed specifications

E2-9010 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 cores2 (Dual-core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads22
Base clock speed2 GHz2.16 GHz
Boost clock speed2.2 GHz2.58 GHz
L1 cacheno data56K (per core)
L2 cache2048 KB512K (per core)
L3 cacheno data0 KB
Chip lithography28 nm22 nm
Die size124.5 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature90 °C100 °C
Number of transistors1200 Millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on E2-9010 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 configurationno data1
SocketFP4FCBGA1170
Power consumption (TDP)10-15 Watt7.5 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by E2-9010 and Celeron N2840. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsVirtualization,no data
AES-NI+-
FMAFMA4-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data+
Smart Connectno data+

Security technologies

E2-9010 and Celeron N2840 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

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

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by E2-9010 and Celeron N2840 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-dno data-
VT-xno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by E2-9010 and Celeron N2840. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-1866DDR3
Maximum memory sizeno data8 GB
Max memory channels12
Maximum memory bandwidthno data21.32 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon R2 GraphicsIntel HD Graphics for Intel Atom Processor Z3700 Series
iGPU core count2no data
Quick Sync Video-+
Enduro+-
Switchable graphics+-
UVD+-
VCE+-
Graphics max frequencyno data792 MHz

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of E2-9010 and Celeron N2840 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data2
DisplayPort+-
HDMI+-

Graphics API support

APIs supported by E2-9010 and Celeron N2840 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXDirectX® 12no data
Vulkan+-

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by E2-9010 and Celeron N2840.

PCIe version3.02.0
PCI Express lanes84
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.


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.

E2-9010 0.69
+86.5%
Celeron N2840 0.37

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.

E2-9010 1093
+85.9%
Celeron N2840 588

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.

E2-9010 1871
+40.6%
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.

E2-9010 3268
+29%
Celeron N2840 2533

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.

E2-9010 1
+27%
Celeron N2840 1

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

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

E2-9010 91
+19.7%
Celeron N2840 76

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.

E2-9010 53
+39.5%
Celeron N2840 38

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.

E2-9010 0.64
+45.5%
Celeron N2840 0.44

Geekbench 3 32-bit multi-core

E2-9010 2348
+39.1%
Celeron N2840 1688

Geekbench 3 32-bit single-core

E2-9010 1415
+47.9%
Celeron N2840 957

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.69 0.37
Recency 1 June 2016 22 May 2014
Chip lithography 28 nm 22 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 10 Watt 7 Watt

E2-9010 has a 86.5% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 2 years.

Celeron N2840, on the other hand, has a 27.3% more advanced lithography process, and 42.9% lower power consumption.

The E2-9010 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron N2840 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between E2-9010 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.


AMD E2-9010
E2-9010
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.


2.8 32 votes

Rate E2-9010 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.7 660 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 E2-9010 or Celeron N2840, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.