Celeron N2930
VS
Atom C3338

Celeron N2930 vs Atom C3338

Intel

Celeron N2930

4 Cores4 Thrd7 WWMax: 2.16 GHz2014
VS
Intel

Atom C3338

2 Cores2 Thrd9 WWMax: 2.2 GHz2017

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 N2930 is positioned at rank 1087 and the Atom C3338 is on rank 543, so the Atom C3338 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 N2930

#1075
Atom x5-Z8300
MSRP: $20|Avg: N/A
3044%
#1076
Atom Z3735G
MSRP: $17|Avg: N/A
2999%
#1077
Core i5-480M
MSRP: $81|Avg: $77
2753%
#1078
Core i5-460M
MSRP: $80|Avg: $129
2741%
#1079
Core i5-2540M
MSRP: $266|Avg: $10
2716%
#1081
Core i5-450M
MSRP: $32|Avg: $31
2622%
#1082
Core i3-380M
MSRP: $49|Avg: $25
2515%
#1083
Core i5-430M
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $33
2510%
#1084
Core 2 Duo T6600
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $4
2443%
#1087
Celeron N2930
MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A
100%
#1089
Core i5-3610ME
MSRP: $276|Avg: $22
100%
#1090
Core m3-7Y32
MSRP: $281|Avg: $281
100%
#1091
Celeron B720
MSRP: $70|Avg: $10
99%
#1093
Celeron 847
MSRP: $134|Avg: $15
98%
#1094
Core i7-2630QM
MSRP: $378|Avg: N/A
97%
#1096
Core i7-2635QM
MSRP: $378|Avg: N/A
97%
#1097
Celeron 877
MSRP: $86|Avg: $15
97%
#1098
Celeron Dual-Core SU2300
MSRP: $134|Avg: $50
97%
#1099
Core i5-3337U
MSRP: $225|Avg: N/A
96%
#1100
Core i5-2450M
MSRP: $225|Avg: N/A
96%
#1101
Core i5-7Y57
MSRP: $281|Avg: $281
95%
#1102
Core i5-7Y54
MSRP: $281|Avg: $100
95%
Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Per Dollar Atom C3338

#1
Xeon Platinum 8454H
MSRP: $6540|Avg: N/A
8086%
#6
Xeon Gold 6240R
MSRP: $2444|Avg: N/A
1527%
#10
Xeon 6337P
MSRP: $60|Avg: $5
1356%
#15
EPYC 9174F
MSRP: $194|Avg: $30
1048%
#332
Xeon W-2235
MSRP: $555|Avg: $350
100%
#333
Xeon Gold 5317
MSRP: $1088|Avg: $1100
98%
#334
Xeon W-2275
MSRP: $1112|Avg: $500
98%
#335
Xeon Gold 6430
MSRP: $2128|Avg: $1850
97%
#336
Xeon Gold 6421N
MSRP: $2368|Avg: $2427
97%
#543
Atom C3338
MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A
100%
#544
Xeon W3670
MSRP: $250|Avg: $250
100%
#547
Xeon E3-1240 v2
MSRP: $250|Avg: $150
99%
#548
Xeon E3-1220 v3
MSRP: $203|Avg: $89
99%
#551
Xeon W-2102
MSRP: $202|Avg: $286
98%
#553
Xeon E3-1265L v2
MSRP: $265|Avg: N/A
98%
Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Comparison

About PassMark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

Generational Difference: This comparison involves processors from different technological eras. The Atom C3338 (2017) utilizes 14 nm technology and DDR4: 1866, providing a fundamental performance advantage.
InsightCeleron N2930Atom C3338
Gaming
Lower gaming performance
Superior gaming performance
Workstation
Better multi-core power
Weaker in multi-core tasks
Price
Equivalent pricing
Equivalent pricing
Longevity
🛑 Legacy (Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) / 22 nm)
✨ Modern (Goldmont (2016−2017) / 14 nm)

💎 Value Proposition

The Celeron N2930 (2014) relies on 22 nm technology and DDR3, placing it in a different performance category relative to modern standards.
InsightCeleron N2930Atom C3338
Cost Efficiency
Lower cost efficiency
Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost
Equivalent pricing
Equivalent pricing

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 N2930 and Atom C3338

Intel

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.

Intel

Atom C3338

The Atom C3338 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 22 February 2017 (8 years ago). It is based on the Goldmont (2016−2017) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.5 GHz, with boost up to 2.2 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB. L2 cache: 4 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1310. Thermal design power (TDP): 8.5 Watt. Memory support: DDR4: 1866. Passmark benchmark score: 1,028 points. Launch price was $27.

Processing Power

The Celeron N2930 packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Atom C3338 offers 2 cores / 2 threads — the Celeron N2930 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.16 GHz on the Celeron N2930 versus 2.2 GHz on the Atom C3338 — a 1.8% clock advantage for the Atom C3338 (base: 1.83 GHz vs 1.5 GHz). The Celeron N2930 uses the Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) architecture (22 nm), while the Atom C3338 uses Goldmont (2016−2017) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron N2930 scores 1,032 against the Atom C3338's 1,028 — a 0.4% lead for the Celeron N2930. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Celeron N2930 vs 4 MB on the Atom C3338.

FeatureCeleron N2930Atom C3338
Cores / Threads
4 / 4+100%
2 / 2
Boost Clock
2.16 GHz
2.2 GHz+2%
Base Clock
1.83 GHz+22%
1.5 GHz
L3 Cache
0 kB
4 MB
L2 Cache
512K (per core)
4 MB+700%
Process
22 nm
14 nm-36%
Architecture
Bay Trail-M (2013−2014)
Goldmont (2016−2017)
PassMark
1,032
1,028
Geekbench 6 Single
170
Geekbench 6 Multi
502
🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron N2930 uses the FCBGA1170 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Atom C3338 uses FCBGA1310 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3L-1333 on the Celeron N2930 versus DDR4-1866 on the Atom C3338 — the Atom C3338 supports 28.6% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Atom C3338 supports up to 128 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB 176.5% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Celeron N2930) vs 1 (Atom C3338). PCIe lanes: 4 (Celeron N2930) vs 10 (Atom C3338) — the Atom C3338 offers 6 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: SoC (Celeron N2930) and Intel FCBGA1310 (Atom C3338).

FeatureCeleron N2930Atom C3338
Socket
FCBGA1170
FCBGA1310
PCIe Generation
PCIe 2.0
PCIe 3.0+50%
Max RAM Speed
DDR3L-1333
DDR4-1866+33%
Max RAM Capacity
8 GB
128 GB+1500%
RAM Channels
2+100%
1
ECC Support
PCIe Lanes
4
10+150%
🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: Yes (Celeron N2930) / not specified (Atom C3338). The Celeron N2930 includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics), while the Atom C3338 requires a dedicated GPU.

FeatureCeleron N2930Atom C3338
Integrated GPU
Yes
No
IGPU Model
Intel HD Graphics
AVX-512
No
Virtualization
Yes