Atom Z2560 vs Celeron N2820

PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

Atom Z2560 vs Celeron N2820 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Atom Z2560 vs Celeron N2820: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

Atom Z2560

2013

Why buy it

✅Draws 3W instead of 7W, a 4W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Celeron N2820 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (1,056 vs 1,061).

Celeron N2820

2013

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +4.6% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (4 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌133.3% higher power demand at 7W vs 3W.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron N2820 better than Atom Z2560?

Yes. Celeron N2820 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 4.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 0.5% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Celeron N2820 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 4.6% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Celeron N2820 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.5% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Celeron N2820 still makes the most sense overall. Celeron N2820 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 4.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Celeron N2820 is the safer long-term CPU choice because it gives you more room to grow and a better platform outlook.

Atom Z2560 vs Celeron N2820 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Atom Z2560

The Atom Z2560 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 27 February 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Clovertrail (2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Max frequency: 1.6 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FC-MB4760. Thermal design power (TDP): 3 Watt. Memory support: DDR2. Passmark benchmark score: 1,056 points. Launch price was $69.

Celeron N2820

The Celeron N2820 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 December 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.13 GHz, with boost up to 2.39 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1170. Thermal design power (TDP): 7.5 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,061 points. Launch price was $107.

⚡

Processing Power

The Atom Z2560 packs 2 cores / 4 threads, matching the Celeron N2820's 2 cores. Boost clocks reach 1.6 GHz on the Atom Z2560 versus 2.39 GHz on the Celeron N2820 — a 39.6% clock advantage for the Celeron N2820. The Atom Z2560 uses the Clovertrail (2013) architecture (32 nm), while the Celeron N2820 uses Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Atom Z2560 scores 1,056 against the Celeron N2820's 1,061 — a 0.5% lead for the Celeron N2820. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

Feature	Atom Z2560	Celeron N2820
Cores / Threads	2 / 4	2 / 2
Boost Clock	1.6 GHz	2.39 GHz+49%
Base Clock	—	2.13 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	0 kB
L2 Cache	512K (per core)	512K (per core)
Process	32 nm	22 nm-31%
Architecture	Clovertrail (2013)	Bay Trail-M (2013−2014)
PassMark	1,056	1,061
Geekbench 6 Single	—	220
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	400

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Atom Z2560 uses the FC-MB4760 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Celeron N2820 uses FCBGA1170 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to LPDDR2-1066 memory speed. The Celeron N2820 supports up to 8 GB of RAM compared to 2 GB — 300% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 0 (Atom Z2560) vs 4 (Celeron N2820) — the Celeron N2820 offers 4 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Intel BGA1264 (Atom Z2560) and SoC (Celeron N2820).

Feature	Atom Z2560	Celeron N2820
Socket	FC-MB4760	FCBGA1170
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	LPDDR2-1066	DDR3L-1066
Max RAM Capacity	2 GB	8 GB+300%
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	0	4

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: not specified (Atom Z2560) / VT-x (Celeron N2820). Both include integrated graphics — PowerVR SGX544MP2 (Atom Z2560) and Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail) (Celeron N2820) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron N2820 targets Netbook. Direct competitor: Celeron N2820 rivals AMD A6-6310.