Celeron M 900 vs Celeron N2807
Celeron M 900
Celeron N2807
Performance Spectrum - CPU
About PassMark
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.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (PassMark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The Celeron M 900 is positioned at rank 797 and the Celeron N2807 is on rank 51, so the Celeron N2807 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Celeron M 900
Performance Per Dollar Celeron N2807
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Celeron M 900 | Celeron N2807 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ✅ Superior gaming performance | ❌ Lower gaming performance |
| Workstation | ✅ Better multi-core power | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks |
| Price | ✅ More affordable ($10) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($60) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Penryn (2008−2011) / 45 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) / 22 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Celeron M 900 | Celeron N2807 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅ Better overall value (+502%) | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅ More affordable ($10) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($60) |
Performance Check
To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.
Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Celeron M 900 and Celeron N2807
Celeron M 900
The Celeron M 900 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 April 2009 (16 years ago). It is based on the Penryn (2008−2011) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 2.2 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: PGA478. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Passmark benchmark score: 2,101 points. Launch price was $70.
Celeron N2807
The Celeron N2807 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 23 February 2014 (11 years ago). It is based on the Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.58 GHz, with boost up to 2.16 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1170. Thermal design power (TDP): 4.3 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,093 points. Launch price was $107.
Processing Power
The Celeron M 900 packs 1 cores / 1 threads, while the Celeron N2807 offers 2 cores / 2 threads — the Celeron N2807 has 1 more core. Boost clocks reach 2.2 GHz on the Celeron M 900 versus 2.16 GHz on the Celeron N2807 — a 1.8% clock advantage for the Celeron M 900. The Celeron M 900 uses the Penryn (2008−2011) architecture (45 nm), while the Celeron N2807 uses Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron M 900 scores 2,101 against the Celeron N2807's 2,093 — a 0.4% lead for the Celeron M 900.
| Feature | Celeron M 900 | Celeron N2807 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 1 / 1 | 2 / 2+100% |
| Boost Clock | 2.2 GHz+2% | 2.16 GHz |
| Base Clock | — | 1.58 GHz |
| L3 Cache | — | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB+100% | 512K (per core) |
| Process | 45 nm | 22 nm-51% |
| Architecture | Penryn (2008−2011) | Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) |
| PassMark | 2,101 | 2,093 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | — | 180 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | — | 320 |
Memory & Platform
The Celeron M 900 uses the PGA478 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Celeron N2807 uses FCBGA1170 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | Celeron M 900 | Celeron N2807 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | PGA478 | FCBGA1170 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 1.1 | PCIe 2.0+82% |
| Max RAM Speed | — | DDR3L-1333 |
| Max RAM Capacity | — | 4 GB |
| RAM Channels | — | 1 |
| ECC Support | — | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | — | 4 |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: not specified (Celeron M 900) / VT-x (Celeron N2807). The Celeron N2807 includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail)), while the Celeron M 900 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron N2807 targets Netbook. Direct competitor: Celeron N2807 rivals AMD E1-6010.
| Feature | Celeron M 900 | Celeron N2807 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | — | Yes |
| IGPU Model | — | Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail) |
| Unlocked | — | No |
| AVX-512 | — | No |
| Virtualization | — | VT-x |
| Target Use | — | Netbook |
Value Analysis
The Celeron M 900 launched at $86 MSRP, while the Celeron N2807 debuted at $107. At current prices ($10 vs $60), the Celeron M 900 is $50 cheaper. In terms of value (PassMark points per dollar), the Celeron M 900 delivers 210.1 pts/$ vs 34.9 pts/$ for the Celeron N2807 — making the Celeron M 900 the 143% better value option.
| Feature | Celeron M 900 | Celeron N2807 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $86-20% | $107 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $10-83% | $60 |
| Performance per Dollar | 210.1+502% | 34.9 |
| Release Date | 2009 | 2014 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Celeron M 900 and Celeron N2807
