Celeron N5095 vs 3020e

#ad
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregated performance score

3020e
2020
2 cores / 2 threads
1.58

Celeron N5095 outperforms 3020e by an impressive 68% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing 3020e and Celeron N5095 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking19921616
Place by popularitynot in top-10056
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.92
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesAMD Raven Ridge (Ryzen 2000 APU)Intel Jasper Lake
Architecture codenameDali (Zen)Jasper Lake (2021)
Release date4 August 2020 (3 years ago)11 January 2021 (3 years ago)
Current priceno data$1654

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

3020e and Celeron N5095 basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.

Physical cores2 (Dual-core)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads24
Base clock speed1.2 GHz2 GHz
Boost clock speed2.6 GHz2.9 GHz
L1 cache192 KBno data
L2 cache1 MB1.5 MB
L3 cache4 MB4 MB
Chip lithography14 nm10 nm
Maximum core temperature105 °C105 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility+-
Unlocked multiplierNoNo

Compatibility

Information on 3020e and Celeron N5095 compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.

Number of CPUs in a configurationno data1
SocketFT5FCBGA1338
Power consumption (TDP)6 Watt15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by 3020e and Celeron N5095. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsDDR4-2400, PCIe 3, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, BMI2, ABM, FMA, ADX, SMEP, SMAP, CPB, AES-NI, RDRAND, RDSEED, SHA, SMEIntel® SSE4.2
AES-NI++
FMA+no data
AVX+no data
vProno data-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Speed Shiftno data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoringno data+
Smart Responseno data-
GPIOno data+
Turbo Boost Max 3.0no data-
Statusno dataLaunched

Security technologies

3020e and Celeron N5095 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
Identity Protectionno data+
SGXno data-
OS Guardno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by 3020e and Celeron N5095 are enumerated here.

VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by 3020e and Celeron N5095. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4DDR4
Maximum memory sizeno data16 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
ECC memory supportno data-

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon RX Vega 3Intel UHD Graphics
Quick Sync Videono data+
Graphics max frequencyno data750 MHz
Execution Unitsno data16

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of 3020e and Celeron N5095 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data3
eDPno data+
DisplayPortno data+
HDMIno data+
MIPI-DSIno data+

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by 3020e and Celeron N5095 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

4K resolution supportno data+
Max resolution over HDMI 1.4no data4096x2160@60Hz
Max resolution over eDPno data4096x2160@60Hz
Max resolution over DisplayPortno data4096x2160@60Hz

Graphics API support

APIs supported by 3020e and Celeron N5095 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno data12
OpenGLno data4.5

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by 3020e and Celeron N5095.

PCI Express lanesno data8
USB revisionno data2.0/3.2
Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Portsno data2
Number of USB portsno data14
Integrated LANno data-
UARTno data+

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

3020e 1.58
Celeron N5095 2.65
+67.7%

Celeron N5095 outperforms 3020e by 68% based on our aggregated benchmark results.


Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

Benchmark coverage: 68%

3020e 2445
Celeron N5095 4092
+67.4%

Celeron N5095 outperforms 3020e by 67% in Passmark.

wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

Benchmark coverage: 18%

3020e 29
Celeron N5095 19.49
+48.8%

3020e outperforms Celeron N5095 by 49% in wPrime 32.

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.

Benchmark coverage: 15%

3020e 196
Celeron N5095 364
+85.7%

Celeron N5095 outperforms 3020e by 86% in Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core.

Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R15 (standing for Release 15) is a benchmark made by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version (sometimes called Single-Thread) only uses a single processor thread to render a room full of reflective spheres and light sources.

Benchmark coverage: 15%

3020e 92
Celeron N5095 106
+15.2%

Celeron N5095 outperforms 3020e by 15% in Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core.

TrueCrypt AES

TrueCrypt is a discontinued piece of software that was widely used for on-the-fly-encryption of disk partitions, now superseded by VeraCrypt. It contains several embedded performance tests, one of them being TrueCrypt AES, which measures data encryption speed using AES algorithm. Result is encryption speed in gigabytes per second.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

3020e 1.1
Celeron N5095 2.5
+127%

Celeron N5095 outperforms 3020e by 127% in TrueCrypt AES.

WinRAR 4.0

WinRAR 4.0 is an outdated version of a popular file archiver. It contains an internal speed test, using 'Best' setting of RAR compression on large chunks of randomly generated data. Its results are measured in kilobytes per second.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

3020e 1232
Celeron N5095 1706
+38.4%

Celeron N5095 outperforms 3020e by 38% in WinRAR 4.0.

x264 encoding pass 1

x264 version 4.0 is a video encoding benchmark uses MPEG 4 x264 compression method to compress a sample HD (720p) video. Pass 1 is a faster variant that produces a constant bit rate output file. Its result is measured in frames per second, which means how many frames of the source video file were encoded per second.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

3020e 65
Celeron N5095 117
+78.4%

Celeron N5095 outperforms 3020e by 78% in x264 encoding pass 1.

x264 encoding pass 2

x264 Pass 2 is a slower variant of x264 video compression that produces a variable bit rate output file, which results in better quality since the higher bit rate is used when it is needed more. Benchmark result is still measured in frames per second.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

3020e 13
Celeron N5095 25
+95.3%

Celeron N5095 outperforms 3020e by 95% in x264 encoding pass 2.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.58 2.65
Integrated graphics card 2.97
Recency 4 August 2020 11 January 2021
Physical cores 2 4
Threads 2 4
Chip lithography 14 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 6 Watt 15 Watt

The Celeron N5095 is our recommended choice as it beats the 3020e in performance tests.

Be aware that 3020e is a notebook processor while Celeron N5095 is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between 3020e and Celeron N5095, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


AMD 3020e
3020e
Intel Celeron N5095
Celeron N5095

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


3.3 769 votes

Rate 3020e on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 1213 votes

Rate Celeron N5095 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about 3020e or Celeron N5095, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.