Celeron N2805 vs E1-2100

Celeron N2805 vs E1-2100 Performance Spectrum

Celeron N2805

2 / 2

1,430

0.0%

1,435

+0.3%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

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.

Celeron N2805 vs E1-2100 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.

Celeron N2805 vs E1-2100: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron N2805

2013

Why buy it

✅Draws 4W instead of 9W, a 5W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (4 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail), while E1-2100 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,430 vs 1,435).

E1-2100

2013

Why buy it

✅+0.3% higher PassMark.

Trade-offs

❌125% higher power demand at 9W vs 4W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron N2805 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is E1-2100 better than Celeron N2805?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Celeron N2805 is ahead with a 0.7% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, E1-2100 pulls ahead with 0.3% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, E1-2100 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.3% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

E1-2100 still makes the most sense overall. E1-2100 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 0.3% better PassMark.

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

E1-2100 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 2 threads instead of 2/2. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Celeron N2805 vs E1-2100 Technical Specifications

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

Celeron N2805

The Celeron N2805 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 11 September 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 1.46 GHz, with boost up to 1.46 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: 1,430 points. Launch price was $107.

E1-2100

The E1-2100 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Kabini (2013−2014) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1024 kB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: FT3. Thermal design power (TDP): 9 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,435 points. Launch price was $50.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Celeron N2805 and E1-2100 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 1.46 GHz on the Celeron N2805 versus 1 GHz on the E1-2100 — a 37.4% clock advantage for the Celeron N2805. The Celeron N2805 uses the Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) architecture (22 nm), while the E1-2100 uses Kabini (2013−2014) (28 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron N2805 scores 1,430 against the E1-2100's 1,435 — a 0.3% lead for the E1-2100. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

Feature	Celeron N2805	E1-2100
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	1.46 GHz+46%	1 GHz
Base Clock	1.46 GHz	—
L3 Cache	0 kB	0 kB
L2 Cache	512K (per core)	1024 kB+100%
Process	22 nm-21%	28 nm
Architecture	Bay Trail-M (2013−2014)	Kabini (2013−2014)
PassMark	1,430	1,435

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron N2805 uses the FCBGA1170 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the E1-2100 uses FT3 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Celeron N2805	E1-2100
Socket	FCBGA1170	FT3
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	1066	—
Max RAM Capacity	4	—
RAM Channels	1	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	4	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: true (Celeron N2805) / not specified (E1-2100). The Celeron N2805 includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail)), while the E1-2100 requires a dedicated GPU. Direct competitor: Celeron N2805 rivals AMD E1-2100.