Celeron N3450 vs Atom x7-Z8700

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Atom x7-Z8700
2015
4 cores / 4 threads
0.86
Celeron N3450
2016
4 cores / 4 threads, 6 Watt
1.28
+48.8%

Celeron N3450 outperforms Atom x7-Z8700 by a considerable 49% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Atom x7-Z8700 and Celeron N3450 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking24582190
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Series7x Intel AtomIntel Celeron
Architecture codenameCherry Trail (2016)Apollo Lake (2016)
Release date2 March 2015 (9 years ago)1 September 2016 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$107
Current price$377 $242 (2.3x MSRP)

Detailed specifications

Atom x7-Z8700 and Celeron N3450 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads44
Base clock speed1.6 GHz1.1 GHz
Boost clock speed2.4 GHz2.2 GHz
L2 cache2 MB2 MB
L3 cache0 KB0 KB
Chip lithography14 nm14 nm
Maximum core temperature90 °C105 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplierNoNo

Compatibility

Information on Atom x7-Z8700 and Celeron N3450 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 configuration1 (Uniprocessor)1
SocketUTFCBGA1380FCBGA1296
Power consumption (TDP)no data6 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Atom x7-Z8700 and Celeron N3450. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoringno data+
SIPPno data-
Smart Responseno data-
GPIOno data+
Smart Connectno data-
StatusDiscontinuedDiscontinued
HD Audiono data+
RSTno data-

Security technologies

Atom x7-Z8700 and Celeron N3450 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+
EDBno data+
Secure Boot++
Secure Keyno data+
MPXno data+
Identity Protection++
OS Guardno data+
Anti-Theftno data-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Atom x7-Z8700 and Celeron N3450 are enumerated here.

VT-dno data+
VT-x++
VT-ino data-
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Atom x7-Z8700 and Celeron N3450. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3, DDR4
Maximum memory size8 GB8 GB
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidth25.6 GB/sno data
ECC memory supportno data-

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Intel HD GraphicsIntel HD Graphics 500
Max video memory8 GB8 GB
Quick Sync Videono data+
Clear Videono data+
Clear Video HDno data+
Graphics max frequency600 MHz700 MHz
Execution Units1612

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Atom x7-Z8700 and Celeron N3450 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported33
eDPno data+
DisplayPortno data+
HDMIno data+
MIPI-DSIno data+

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by Atom x7-Z8700 and Celeron N3450 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

Max resolution over HDMI 1.43840x2160no data
Max resolution over eDP2560x1600no data

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Atom x7-Z8700 and Celeron N3450 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno data+
OpenGLno data+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Atom x7-Z8700 and Celeron N3450.

PCIe version2.02.0
PCI Express lanes26
USB revision3.02.0/3.0
Total number of SATA portsno data2
Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Portsno data2
Number of USB ports38
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.

Atom x7-Z8700 0.86
Celeron N3450 1.28
+48.8%

Celeron N3450 outperforms Atom x7-Z8700 by 49% based on our aggregate 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%

Atom x7-Z8700 1331
Celeron N3450 1986
+49.2%

Celeron N3450 outperforms Atom x7-Z8700 by 49% in Passmark.

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

Benchmark coverage: 42%

Atom x7-Z8700 178
Celeron N3450 240
+34.8%

Celeron N3450 outperforms Atom x7-Z8700 by 35% in GeekBench 5 Single-Core.

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

Benchmark coverage: 42%

Atom x7-Z8700 513
Celeron N3450 667
+30%

Celeron N3450 outperforms Atom x7-Z8700 by 30% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

Benchmark coverage: 20%

Atom x7-Z8700 1114
Celeron N3450 1415
+27%

Celeron N3450 outperforms Atom x7-Z8700 by 27% in Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core.

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

Atom x7-Z8700 3116
Celeron N3450 3959
+27.1%

Celeron N3450 outperforms Atom x7-Z8700 by 27% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.

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%

Atom x7-Z8700 24.51
Celeron N3450 22.31
+9.9%

Atom x7-Z8700 outperforms Celeron N3450 by 10% in wPrime 32.

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

Atom x7-Z8700 1
Celeron N3450 2
+48.4%

Celeron N3450 outperforms Atom x7-Z8700 by 48% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core.

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%

Atom x7-Z8700 116
Celeron N3450 143
+23.3%

Celeron N3450 outperforms Atom x7-Z8700 by 23% 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%

Atom x7-Z8700 38
Celeron N3450 45
+18.7%

Celeron N3450 outperforms Atom x7-Z8700 by 19% in Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core.

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R11.5 is an old benchmark 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 loads a single thread with ray tracing to render a glossy room full of crystal spheres and light sources.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

Atom x7-Z8700 0.41
Celeron N3450 0.53
+29.3%

Celeron N3450 outperforms Atom x7-Z8700 by 29% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core.

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%

Atom x7-Z8700 10
Celeron N3450 12
+16.7%

Celeron N3450 outperforms Atom x7-Z8700 by 17% in x264 encoding pass 2.

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%

Atom x7-Z8700 51
Celeron N3450 58
+14.5%

Celeron N3450 outperforms Atom x7-Z8700 by 15% in x264 encoding pass 1.

Geekbench 3 32-bit multi-core

Benchmark coverage: 5%

Atom x7-Z8700 3300
Celeron N3450 3958
+19.9%

Celeron N3450 outperforms Atom x7-Z8700 by 20% in Geekbench 3 32-bit multi-core.

Geekbench 3 32-bit single-core

Benchmark coverage: 5%

Atom x7-Z8700 970
Celeron N3450 1202
+23.9%

Celeron N3450 outperforms Atom x7-Z8700 by 24% in Geekbench 3 32-bit single-core.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.86 1.28
Recency 2 March 2015 1 September 2016

The Celeron N3450 is our recommended choice as it beats the Atom x7-Z8700 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Atom x7-Z8700 and Celeron N3450, 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.


Intel Atom x7-Z8700
Atom x7-Z8700
Intel Celeron N3450
Celeron N3450

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.


3.7 20 votes

Rate Atom x7-Z8700 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 147 votes

Rate Celeron N3450 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Atom x7-Z8700 or Celeron N3450, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.