Celeron N2808 vs Turion 64 ML-44

Celeron N2808 vs Turion 64 ML-44 Performance Spectrum

Celeron N2808

2 / 2

615

0.0%

645

+4.9%

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 N2808 vs Turion 64 ML-44 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 N2808 vs Turion 64 ML-44: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron N2808

2014

Why buy it

✅100+% more PCIe lanes (4 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics (Bay Trail), while Turion 64 ML-44 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Turion 64 ML-44 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (615 vs 645).
❌300% higher power demand at 4W vs 1W.

Turion 64 ML-44

2006

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +6.6% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 1W instead of 4W, a 3W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron N2808 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Turion 64 ML-44 better than Celeron N2808?

Yes. Turion 64 ML-44 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 6.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 4.9% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Turion 64 ML-44 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 6.6% 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, Turion 64 ML-44 is the stronger fit. You are getting 4.9% better PassMark, backed by 1 cores and 1 threads.

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

Turion 64 ML-44 still makes the most sense overall. Turion 64 ML-44 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 6.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

Celeron N2808 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2014 vs 2006). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Celeron N2808 vs Turion 64 ML-44 Technical Specifications

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

Celeron N2808

The Celeron N2808 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. 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 2.25 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1170. Thermal design power (TDP): 4.5 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 615 points. Launch price was $69.

Turion 64 ML-44

The Turion 64 ML-44 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Lancaster (2005−2006) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 2.4 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 90 nm process technology. Socket: 754. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Passmark benchmark score: 645 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron N2808 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Turion 64 ML-44 offers 1 cores / 1 threads — the Celeron N2808 has 1 more core. Boost clocks reach 2.25 GHz on the Celeron N2808 versus 2.4 GHz on the Turion 64 ML-44 — a 6.5% clock advantage for the Turion 64 ML-44. The Celeron N2808 uses the Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) architecture (22 nm), while the Turion 64 ML-44 uses Lancaster (2005−2006) (90 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron N2808 scores 615 against the Turion 64 ML-44's 645 — a 4.8% lead for the Turion 64 ML-44. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

Feature	Celeron N2808	Turion 64 ML-44
Cores / Threads	2 / 2+100%	1 / 1
Boost Clock	2.25 GHz	2.4 GHz+7%
Base Clock	1.58 GHz	—
L3 Cache	0 kB	0 kB
L2 Cache	512K (per core)+51100%	1 MB
Process	22 nm-76%	90 nm
Architecture	Bay Trail-M (2013−2014)	Lancaster (2005−2006)
PassMark	615	645+5%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron N2808 uses the FCBGA1170 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Turion 64 ML-44 uses 754 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Celeron N2808	Turion 64 ML-44
Socket	FCBGA1170	754
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3L-1333	—
Max RAM Capacity	4 GB	—
RAM Channels	1	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	4	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x (Celeron N2808) / not specified (Turion 64 ML-44). The Celeron N2808 includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics (Bay Trail)), while the Turion 64 ML-44 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron N2808 targets Mobile.