Celeron N2920 vs Celeron N2930

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 N2920 vs Celeron N2930 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 N2920 vs Celeron N2930: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron N2920

2013

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,030 vs 1,032).

Celeron N2930

2014

Why buy it

Trade-offs

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

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron N2930 better than Celeron N2920?

Yes. Celeron N2930 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you 0.2% better PassMark and the stronger long-term platform, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Celeron N2930 has the edge because it leads the single-thread side of this matchup with 8% higher max boost clock.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Celeron N2930 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.2% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads.

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

Celeron N2930 still makes the most sense overall. Celeron N2930 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 0.2% higher PassMark.

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

Celeron N2930 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2014 vs 2013) and more multi-core headroom with 4 cores / 4 threads instead of 4/4. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Celeron N2920 vs Celeron N2930 Technical Specifications

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

Celeron N2920

The Celeron N2920 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 December 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.86 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: 1,030 points. Launch price was $107.

Celeron N2930

The Celeron N2930 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.83 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): 7.5 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,032 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Celeron N2920 and Celeron N2930 share an identical 4-core/4-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2 GHz on the Celeron N2920 versus 2.16 GHz on the Celeron N2930 — a 7.7% clock advantage for the Celeron N2930 (base: 1.86 GHz vs 1.83 GHz). Both are built on the Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) architecture using a 22 nm process. In PassMark, the Celeron N2920 scores 1,030 against the Celeron N2930's 1,032 — a 0.2% lead for the Celeron N2930. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

Feature	Celeron N2920	Celeron N2930
Cores / Threads	4 / 4	4 / 4
Boost Clock	2 GHz	2.16 GHz+8%
Base Clock	1.86 GHz+2%	1.83 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	0 kB
L2 Cache	512K (per core)	512K (per core)
Process	22 nm	22 nm
Architecture	Bay Trail-M (2013−2014)	Bay Trail-M (2013−2014)
PassMark	1,030	1,032
Geekbench 6 Single	—	170
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	502

🧠

Memory & Platform

Both processors use the FCBGA1170 socket with PCIe 2.0. Maximum memory speed reaches 1066 on the Celeron N2920 versus DDR3L-1333 on the Celeron N2930 — the Celeron N2930 supports 25% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Both support up to 8 GB of RAM. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 4 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: FCBGA1170 (Celeron N2920) and SoC (Celeron N2930).

Feature	Celeron N2920	Celeron N2930
Socket	FCBGA1170	FCBGA1170
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	1066	DDR3L-1333+25%
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	8 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	4	4

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization support: true (Celeron N2920) vs Yes (Celeron N2930). Both include integrated graphics — Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail) (Celeron N2920) and Intel HD Graphics (Celeron N2930) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Direct competitor: Celeron N2920 rivals AMD A4-6210.