Celeron N2807
VS
Pentium G2140

Celeron N2807 vs Pentium G2140

Intel

Celeron N2807

2 Cores2 Thrd4 WWMax: 2.16 GHz2014
VS
Intel

Pentium G2140

2 Cores2 Thrd55 WW2013

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 N2807 is positioned at rank 51 and the Pentium G2140 is on rank 775, so the Celeron N2807 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar Celeron N2807

#13
Ryzen 3 210
MSRP: $99|Avg: $99
96%
#39
Atom x5-Z8300
MSRP: $20|Avg: N/A
210%
#40
Atom Z3735G
MSRP: $17|Avg: N/A
207%
#41
Core i5-480M
MSRP: $81|Avg: $77
190%
#42
Core i5-460M
MSRP: $80|Avg: $129
189%
#43
Core i5-2540M
MSRP: $266|Avg: $10
188%
#45
Core i5-450M
MSRP: $32|Avg: $31
181%
#46
Core i3-380M
MSRP: $49|Avg: $25
174%
#47
Core i5-430M
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $33
173%
#48
Core 2 Duo T6600
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $4
169%
#51
Celeron N2807
MSRP: $107|Avg: $60
100%
#65
Core i5-3320M
MSRP: $225|Avg: N/A
95%
#66
Core i7-4510U
MSRP: $393|Avg: N/A
94%
Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Per Dollar Pentium G2140

#1
Ryzen 9 7950X
MSRP: $194|Avg: $20
14900%
#2
Core i9-10900T
MSRP: $120|Avg: $5
14079%
#3
Ryzen 3 PRO 4355GE
MSRP: $423|Avg: $5
10223%
#4
Ryzen Threadripper 3960X
MSRP: $1399|Avg: $85
3080%
#5
Ryzen 9 9950X
MSRP: $649|Avg: $129
2439%
#6
Ryzen 5 8400F
MSRP: $303|Avg: $55
2134%
#7
Ryzen 7 PRO 2700
MSRP: $299|Avg: $60
1222%
#8
Ryzen 5 2600X
MSRP: $229|Avg: $55
1206%
#9
Ryzen 3 PRO 5350G
MSRP: $150|Avg: $60
1098%
#10
Core Ultra 5 245KF
MSRP: $294|Avg: $189
1098%
#11
Ryzen 5 5500
MSRP: $159|Avg: $85
1086%
#12
Ryzen 5 3600
MSRP: $199|Avg: $80
1057%
#13
Core i3-9100E
MSRP: $202|Avg: $30
1042%
#14
Core Ultra 5 245K
MSRP: $319|Avg: $200
1038%
#15
Core i3-8300T
MSRP: $138|Avg: $25
1028%
#393
Core i3-9300T
MSRP: $309|Avg: $309
98%
#775
Pentium G2140
MSRP: $100|Avg: $95
100%
#776
Core i7-4790T
MSRP: $303|Avg: $102
100%
#777
Core i5-2320
MSRP: $177|Avg: $22
100%
#778
Celeron E3500
MSRP: $62|Avg: $10
99%
#779
Pentium G2030
MSRP: $85|Avg: $85
99%
#780
Athlon II X2 260
MSRP: $60|Avg: $12
99%
#781
Athlon II X3 445
MSRP: $87|Avg: $15
99%
#783
Core i5-2310
MSRP: $177|Avg: $12
99%
#784
Core i5-5675C
MSRP: $276|Avg: $66
99%
#785
Core i5-2380P
MSRP: $177|Avg: $25
98%
#786
Core i5-4690
MSRP: $272|Avg: $120
98%
#787
FX-6120
MSRP: $188|Avg: $54
98%
#788
Core i7-6700TE
MSRP: $303|Avg: $175
98%
#790
Athlon II X4 620
MSRP: $99|Avg: $15
98%
Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Comparison

About PassMark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

Performance Trade-off: The Pentium G2140 leads in gaming performance. However, the Celeron N2807 is the stronger candidate for professional workloads, offering 0% greater multi-core processing power.
InsightCeleron N2807Pentium G2140
Gaming
Lower gaming performance
Superior gaming performance
Workstation
Better multi-core power
Weaker in multi-core tasks
Price
More affordable ($60)
⚠️ Higher cost ($95)
Longevity
🛑 Legacy (Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) / 22 nm)
🛑 Legacy (Legacy / 22 nm)

💎 Value Proposition

Efficiency: Even within a comparison of older hardware, the Celeron N2807 stands out as the superior choice. It is effectively 37% cheaper ($60 vs $95) while identifying as the stronger performer.
InsightCeleron N2807Pentium G2140
Cost Efficiency
Better overall value (+58%)
Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost
More affordable ($60)
⚠️ Higher cost ($95)

Performance Check

Paired with RTX 4090

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 N2807 and Pentium G2140

Intel

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.

Intel

Pentium G2140

The Pentium G2140 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency: 3.3 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB Intel® Smart Cache. Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1155. Thermal design power (TDP): 55 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-1333, DDR3-1600. Passmark benchmark score: 2,092 points. Launch price was $69.

Processing Power

Both the Celeron N2807 and Pentium G2140 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. The Celeron N2807 is built on the Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) architecture. In PassMark, the Celeron N2807 scores 2,093 against the Pentium G2140's 2,092 — a 0% lead for the Celeron N2807. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 180 vs 550, a 101.4% lead for the Pentium G2140 that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 320 vs 920 (96.8% advantage for the Pentium G2140). L3 cache: 0 kB on the Celeron N2807 vs 3 MB Intel® Smart Cache on the Pentium G2140.

FeatureCeleron N2807Pentium G2140
Cores / Threads
2 / 2
2 / 2
Boost Clock
2.16 GHz
Base Clock
1.58 GHz
3.3 GHz+109%
L3 Cache
0 kB
3 MB Intel® Smart Cache
L2 Cache
512K (per core)
Process
22 nm
22 nm
Architecture
Bay Trail-M (2013−2014)
PassMark
2,093
2,092
Geekbench 6 Single
180
550+206%
Geekbench 6 Multi
320
920+188%
🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron N2807 uses the FCBGA1170 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Pentium G2140 uses LGA1155 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR3L-1333 memory speed. The Pentium G2140 supports up to 32 GB of RAM compared to 4 GB 155.6% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 1 (Celeron N2807) vs 2 (Pentium G2140). PCIe lanes: 4 (Celeron N2807) vs 16 (Pentium G2140) — the Pentium G2140 offers 12 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: SoC (Celeron N2807) and H61,B75 (Pentium G2140).

FeatureCeleron N2807Pentium G2140
Socket
FCBGA1170
LGA1155
PCIe Generation
PCIe 2.0
PCIe 3.0+50%
Max RAM Speed
DDR3L-1333
DDR3-1600
Max RAM Capacity
4 GB
32 GB+700%
RAM Channels
1
2+100%
ECC Support
PCIe Lanes
4
16+300%
🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Both support VT-x virtualization. Both include integrated graphics Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail) (Celeron N2807) and Intel HD Graphics (Pentium G2140) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron N2807 targets Netbook, Pentium G2140 targets Legacy Desktop. Direct competitor: Celeron N2807 rivals AMD E1-6010.

FeatureCeleron N2807Pentium G2140
Integrated GPU
Yes
Yes
IGPU Model
Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail)
Intel HD Graphics
Unlocked
No
No
AVX-512
No
No
Virtualization
VT-x
VT-x
Target Use
Netbook
Legacy Desktop
💰

Value Analysis

The Celeron N2807 launched at $107 MSRP, while the Pentium G2140 debuted at $100. At current prices ($60 vs $95), the Celeron N2807 is $35 cheaper. In terms of value (PassMark points per dollar), the Celeron N2807 delivers 34.9 pts/$ vs 22.0 pts/$ for the Pentium G2140 — making the Celeron N2807 the 45.2% better value option.

FeatureCeleron N2807Pentium G2140
MSRP
$107
$100-7%
Avg Price (30d)
$60-37%
$95
Performance per Dollar
34.9+59%
22.0
Release Date
2014
2013