Celeron N2807 vs Core 2 Quad Q6700

CPU

GPU

Celeron N2807

2 Cores2 Thrd4 WWMax: 2.16 GHz2014

Buy on Amazon

Core 2 Quad Q6700

4 Cores4 Thrd95 WWMax: 2.67 GHz2007

Buy on Amazon

Celeron N2807 vs Core 2 Quad Q6700 Performance Spectrum

Celeron N2807

2 / 2

2,093

0.0%

2,092

0.0%

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 N2807 vs Core 2 Quad Q6700 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 N2807 vs Core 2 Quad Q6700: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron N2807

2014

Why buy it

✅+0% higher PassMark.
✅Costs $423 less on MSRP ($107 MSRP vs $530 MSRP).
✅Delivers 395.6% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 19.6 vs 3.9 PassMark/$ ($107 MSRP vs $530 MSRP).
✅Draws 4W instead of 95W, a 91W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (4 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.

Core 2 Quad Q6700

2007

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (2,092 vs 2,093).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 3.9 vs 19.6 PassMark/$ ($530 MSRP vs $107 MSRP).
❌2275% higher power demand at 95W vs 4W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron N2807 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron N2807 better than Core 2 Quad Q6700?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Core 2 Quad Q6700 is ahead with a 0.4% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Celeron N2807 pulls ahead with 0% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Celeron N2807 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Celeron N2807 is the better buy right now. Celeron N2807 comes in $423 cheaper on MSRP at $107 MSRP versus $530 MSRP, and it still gives you 0% better PassMark. The compromise is that Core 2 Quad Q6700 is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 0.4% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 395.6% better value on MSRP (19.6 vs 3.9 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Celeron N2807 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2014 vs 2007) and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 2 threads instead of 4/4. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Celeron N2807 vs Core 2 Quad Q6700 Technical Specifications

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

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.

Core 2 Quad Q6700

The Core 2 Quad Q6700 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2008-01-01. It is based on the Kentsfield (2007) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.66 GHz, with boost up to 2.67 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 8 MB (total). Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: LGA775. Thermal design power (TDP): 105 Watt. Memory support: DDR1, DDR2, DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,092 points. Launch price was $249.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron N2807 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Core 2 Quad Q6700 offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the Core 2 Quad Q6700 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.16 GHz on the Celeron N2807 versus 2.67 GHz on the Core 2 Quad Q6700 — a 21.1% clock advantage for the Core 2 Quad Q6700 (base: 1.58 GHz vs 2.66 GHz). The Celeron N2807 uses the Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) architecture (22 nm), while the Core 2 Quad Q6700 uses Kentsfield (2007) (65 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron N2807 scores 2,093 against the Core 2 Quad Q6700's 2,092 — a 0% lead for the Celeron N2807. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

Feature	Celeron N2807	Core 2 Quad Q6700
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	4 / 4+100%
Boost Clock	2.16 GHz	2.67 GHz+24%
Base Clock	1.58 GHz	2.66 GHz+68%
L3 Cache	0 kB	0 kB
L2 Cache	512K (per core)+6300%	8 MB (total)
Process	22 nm-66%	65 nm
Architecture	Bay Trail-M (2013−2014)	Kentsfield (2007)
PassMark	2,093	2,092
Geekbench 6 Single	180	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	320	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron N2807 uses the FCBGA1170 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Core 2 Quad Q6700 uses LGA775 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3L-1333 on the Celeron N2807 versus DDR2-800 on the Core 2 Quad Q6700 — the Celeron N2807 supports 66.6% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Core 2 Quad Q6700 supports up to 8 GB of RAM compared to 4 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 1 (Celeron N2807) vs 2 (Core 2 Quad Q6700). PCIe lanes: 4 (Celeron N2807) vs 0 (Core 2 Quad Q6700) — the Celeron N2807 offers 4 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: SoC (Celeron N2807) and P45,G45 (Core 2 Quad Q6700).

Feature	Celeron N2807	Core 2 Quad Q6700
Socket	FCBGA1170	LGA775
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0+82%	PCIe 1.1
Max RAM Speed	DDR3L-1333+67%	DDR2-800
Max RAM Capacity	4 GB	8 GB+100%
RAM Channels	1	2+100%
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	4	0

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Both support VT-x virtualization. The Celeron N2807 includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail)), while the Core 2 Quad Q6700 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron N2807 targets Netbook. Direct competitor: Celeron N2807 rivals AMD E1-6010.

Feature	Celeron N2807	Core 2 Quad Q6700
Integrated GPU	Yes	No
IGPU Model	Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail)	—
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	VT-x	VT-x
Target Use	Netbook	—

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Celeron N2807 was priced at $107, while the Core 2 Quad Q6700 came in at $530. On launch pricing ($107 vs $530), Celeron N2807 was $423 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Celeron N2807 delivers 19.6 pts/$ vs 3.9 pts/$ for the Core 2 Quad Q6700 — making the Celeron N2807 the 132.8% better value option.

Feature	Celeron N2807	Core 2 Quad Q6700
MSRP	$107-80%	$530
Performance per Dollar	19.6+403%	3.9
Release Date	2014	2007

Search Celeron N2807 on Amazon

Search Core 2 Quad Q6700 on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.