Celeron N2810 vs Celeron N4000

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 N2810 vs Celeron N4000 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 N2810 vs Celeron N4000: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron N2810

2013

Why buy it

✅+0.1% higher PassMark.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (4 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail), while Celeron N4000 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌16.7% higher power demand at 7W vs 6W.

Celeron N4000

2017

Why buy it

✅Draws 6W instead of 7W, a 1W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,472 vs 1,474).
❌Launch MSRP is still $107 MSRP, while Celeron N2810 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron N2810 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron N4000 better than Celeron N2810?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Celeron N4000 is ahead with a 2.4% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Celeron N2810 pulls ahead with 0.1% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Celeron N2810 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.1% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Celeron N4000 is the better buy right now. Celeron N4000 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $107 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 2.4% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. The compromise is that Celeron N2810 is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 0.1% better PassMark. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (13.8 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), 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 N4000 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2017 vs 2013). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Celeron N2810 vs Celeron N4000 Technical Specifications

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

Celeron N2810

The Celeron N2810 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 2 GHz, with boost up to 2 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1170. Thermal design power (TDP): 7.5 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,474 points. Launch price was $260.

Celeron N4000

The Celeron N4000 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 11 December 2017 (7 years ago). It is based on the Goldmont Plus (2017) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.1 GHz, with boost up to 2.6 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB. L2 cache: 4 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1090. Thermal design power (TDP): 6 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 1,472 points. Launch price was $107.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Celeron N2810 and Celeron N4000 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2 GHz on the Celeron N2810 versus 2.6 GHz on the Celeron N4000 — a 26.1% clock advantage for the Celeron N4000 (base: 2 GHz vs 1.1 GHz). The Celeron N2810 uses the Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) architecture (22 nm), while the Celeron N4000 uses Goldmont Plus (2017) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron N2810 scores 1,474 against the Celeron N4000's 1,472 — a 0.1% lead for the Celeron N2810. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Celeron N2810 vs 4 MB on the Celeron N4000.

Feature	Celeron N2810	Celeron N4000
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	2 GHz	2.6 GHz+30%
Base Clock	2 GHz+82%	1.1 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	4 MB
L2 Cache	512K (per core)+12700%	4 MB
Process	22 nm	14 nm-36%
Architecture	Bay Trail-M (2013−2014)	Goldmont Plus (2017)
PassMark	1,474	1,472

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron N2810 uses the FCBGA1170 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron N4000 uses FCBGA1090 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Celeron N2810	Celeron N4000
Socket	FCBGA1170	FCBGA1090
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 3.0+50%
Max RAM Speed	1066	—
Max RAM Capacity	8	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	4	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: true (Celeron N2810) / not specified (Celeron N4000). The Celeron N2810 includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail)), while the Celeron N4000 requires a dedicated GPU. Direct competitor: Celeron N2810 rivals AMD A4-1250.