Intel Celeron N2930

The Intel Celeron N2930 is a 4-core, 4-thread Silvermont-based mobile processor from the Bay Trail-M family, and its benchmark data places it at the very bottom of the modern CPU performance spectrum. With an average benchmark score of 301 and a 0th percentile ranking against all CPUs, the data indicates this is a part designed for basic computational tasks, not demanding workloads. Its performance is effectively identical to decade-old desktop dual-core processors, making it a clear entry-level option for low-power, fanless systems.

Benchmark Performance

The Celeron N2930’s benchmark results consistently show a processor that delivers minimal computational throughput. In Cinebench R23, the most demanding test in the data set, the N2930 scores 875 points in multi-core and just 123 points in single-core. The multi-core score of 875 is approximately 7.1 times higher than its single-core score of 123, which indicates that the four physical cores do provide scaling for threaded workloads, but the absolute numbers remain extremely low.

Looking at the broader benchmark suite, the Cinebench R20 results show a multi-core score of 367 and a single-core score of 51. This represents a multi-core advantage of roughly 7.2 times over single-core performance, consistent with the R23 results. The older Cinebench R15 multi-core score of 88 points further confirms the processor’s position: this is a chip that struggles to reach triple-digit scores in even legacy benchmarks. The average benchmark score across all tests is 301 points, which serves as a useful aggregate reference point.

When comparing the N2930 to its nearest rivals, the data shows remarkably tight clustering. The Intel Pentium E6300 has an average score of 301, representing a delta of -0.1% relative to the N2930. The AMD Athlon II X2 220 scores 303, which is 0.8% higher. The Intel Celeron N2940 achieves 305 points, a 1.4% advantage, and the AMD Athlon II X2 240 leads the group with 308 points, 2.1% ahead. These deltas are all within a 2.2 percentage point band, meaning the N2930 is functionally equivalent to these rivals in aggregate performance, despite being a much newer architecture with a dramatically lower power envelope.

How It Compares

Intel Pentium E6300: The N2930 and the Pentium E6300 share an identical average score of 301 points, with a delta of just -0.1%. This is a statistical tie. The Pentium E6300 is a desktop part from an older generation, whereas the N2930 is a mobile chip, yet the benchmark data shows no meaningful performance gap between them. Users moving from a system with an E6300 to an N2930 should expect no change in raw compute capability.

AMD Athlon II X2 220: The Athlon II X2 220 holds a 0.8% performance advantage over the N2930, with an average score of 303 versus 301. This delta is negligible and falls well within typical run-to-run benchmark variance. The N2930’s four cores do not provide a meaningful advantage over this dual-core AMD part in the aggregate scores, which suggests that the Silvermont cores’ individual throughput is significantly lower than that of the older K10 architecture.

Intel Celeron N2940: The N2940, a direct successor in the Bay Trail family, scores 305 points, which is 1.4% higher than the N2930. This is the closest comparison in the rival set, as both share the same architecture and core count. The small delta likely reflects minor clock speed improvements in the N2940. The data shows that within the Bay Trail generation, the N2930 sits at the lower end of the performance ladder.

AMD Athlon II X2 240: The Athlon II X2 240 is the fastest rival listed, with an average score of 308 points, 2.1% ahead of the N2930. Even this largest delta in the group is small enough to be considered negligible for real-world purposes. The N2930’s performance profile is thus firmly anchored to this cluster of low-end processors, none of which are capable of handling modern, demanding applications.

Power and Thermals

The N2930 carries a thermal design power (TDP) of 7 watts. This is an exceptionally low figure that places the processor in the ultra-low-power class. The data shows a 22 nm manufacturing process from Intel, which contributes to this efficiency. The combination of a 7 W TDP and the Silvermont architecture indicates that the processor can be cooled by a passive heatsink or a very small, low-speed fan.

The thermal implications are straightforward: any cooling solution rated as capable of handling a 7 W load will suffice. This includes thin-and-light laptops, compact desktops, and fanless embedded systems. The low TDP also means that sustained multi-core workloads will not generate significant heat, allowing the processor to maintain its boost clock of 2.16 GHz without aggressive thermal throttling in most chassis designs. The base clock of 1830.00 MHz provides a baseline for power draw, with the boost clock representing the upper bound of performance under thermal headroom.

FAQ

Q: What is the average benchmark score of the Intel Celeron N2930?

A: The average benchmark score is 301 points, based on the Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 tests in the data set.

Q: How does the N2930 compare to the Intel Celeron N2940?

A: The N2940 has an average score of 305 points, which is 1.4% higher than the N2930’s 301 points. The two processors are very closely matched.

Q: What is the single-core performance of the N2930 in Cinebench R23?

A: The Cinebench R23 single-core score is 123 points, which is significantly lower than its multi-core score of 875 points.

Q: Does the N2930 support ECC memory?

A: No, the FACT PACK indicates that ECC memory support is false for this processor.

Q: What is the TDP of the N2930?

A: The TDP is 7 watts, which classifies it as an ultra-low-power processor suitable for passive cooling.

Q: What socket does the N2930 use?

A: The processor uses the Intel BGA 1170 socket, which is a ball-grid array design for soldered mobile applications.

Single-Thread vs Multi-Thread Behavior

The benchmark data reveals a clear behavioral split between single-threaded and multi-threaded workloads. In Cinebench R23, the multi-core score of 875 is roughly 7.1 times the single-core score of 123. This scaling factor is close to the theoretical maximum of 4 for a quad-core processor, indicating that the N2930’s cores are fully utilized when all four are active. The R20 results show a similar pattern, with multi-core at 367 and single-core at 51, a ratio of about 7.2.

This strong scaling is a double-edged sword. On one hand, it means that threaded applications like video encoding or batch photo processing will see near-linear benefits from the four cores. On the other hand, the absolute single-core score of 123 in R23 is so low that even well-threaded workloads will complete slowly. The data suggests that the N2930’s Silvermont cores are individually weak but collectively efficient. For single-threaded tasks such as web browsing or word processing, the processor will feel sluggish, as these workloads rely heavily on the 123-point single-core capability. For multi-threaded tasks that can utilize all four cores, the processor performs at a level comparable to the 875-point R23 multi-core score, which is still far below modern desktop processors.

Platform and Compatibility

The N2930 is built for the Intel BGA 1170 socket, which means it is soldered directly to the motherboard and is not upgradeable. This is a mobile and embedded platform, and the data confirms this with a market segment of "Mobile." The processor supports DDR3 memory, though the FACT PACK does not specify a memory bus width or bandwidth figure. ECC memory is not supported, which limits its use in error-sensitive server or workstation environments.

The processor includes integrated HD Graphics, which eliminates the need for a discrete GPU in basic systems. The PCIe support is not listed in the data, so no specific lane configuration can be stated. The production status is "Active," meaning the processor is still in production as of the data snapshot. The release date is 2014-02-22, and the architecture is Silvermont from the Bay Trail-M codename family, built on Intel’s 22 nm process. The upgrade path is effectively non-existent due to the BGA socket; users are confined to the motherboard the processor comes soldered to. The lack of an unlocked multiplier further confirms that this is a fixed, low-power platform with no overclocking headroom.

Who Should Consider It

The N2930 is suitable for users whose workloads align with its 301 average benchmark score and 7 W TDP. For basic office tasks such as document editing, spreadsheet management, and email, the processor’s four cores and 875-point R23 multi-core score are adequate, though single-core responsiveness will be limited by the 123-point R23 single-core score. The integrated HD Graphics handles simple display output without requiring a separate GPU, which simplifies system design.

For light media consumption, such as streaming video or playing audio, the N2930 is sufficient, as these tasks do not demand high CPU throughput. However, for content creation workloads like video editing, 3D rendering, or large-scale photo manipulation, the data indicates the processor is severely underpowered. The Cinebench R15 multi-core score of 88 points places it far below any processor capable of productive creative work. Gaming is also not a realistic use case, as the integrated HD Graphics and low CPU scores will struggle with any modern 3D title.

The ideal use case is an embedded system, a thin client, or a low-cost laptop where battery life and silent operation are priorities over performance. The 7 W TDP allows for fanless designs, and the active production status ensures continued availability. Users who need a processor for simple, single-purpose tasks like a network-attached storage device, a lightweight web server, or a digital signage controller will find the N2930’s performance envelope acceptable. Those who need any level of modern multi-core performance should look at the rival data, which shows even the fastest comparable part, the Athlon II X2 240, is only 2.1% ahead — meaning all options in this performance class are similarly limited.