Celeron N3350 vs 1017U

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron 1017U
2013
2 cores / 2 threads, 17 Watt
0.97
+34.7%

1017U outperforms N3350 by a substantial 35% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron 1017U and Celeron N3350 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking23702574
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel CeleronIntel Celeron
Architecture codenameIvy Bridge (2012−2013)Apollo Lake (2016)
Release date1 July 2013 (10 years ago)1 September 2016 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$24
Current price$299 $251 (10.5x MSRP)

Detailed specifications

Celeron 1017U and Celeron N3350 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)2 (Dual-core)
Threads22
Base clock speed1.6 GHz1.1 GHz
Boost clock speed1.6 GHz2.4 GHz
L1 cache128 KBno data
L2 cache512 KB2 MB
L3 cache2 MB0 KB
Chip lithography22 nm14 nm
Die size94 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature105 °C105 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplierNoNo

Compatibility

Information on Celeron 1017U and Celeron N3350 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 configuration11
SocketFCBGA1023FCBGA1296
Power consumption (TDP)17 Watt6 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 1017U and Celeron N3350. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2no data
AES-NI-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
My WiFi-no data
Turbo Boost Technology--
Hyper-Threading Technology--
Idle States++
Thermal Monitoring++
Flex Memory Access+no data
SIPPno data-
Smart Responseno data-
Demand Based Switching-no data
GPIOno data+
Smart Connectno data-
FDI+no data
Fast Memory Access+no data
StatusDiscontinuedLaunched
HD Audiono data+
RSTno data-

Security technologies

Celeron 1017U and Celeron N3350 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-+
EDB++
Secure Bootno data+
Secure Keyno data+
MPXno data+
Identity Protectionno data+
OS Guardno data+
Anti-Theft--

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron 1017U and Celeron N3350 are enumerated here.

VT-d-+
VT-x++
VT-ino data-
EPT++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron 1017U and Celeron N3350. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3, DDR4
Maximum memory size32 GB8 GB
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidth25.6 GB/sno data
ECC memory support--

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel® HD Graphics for 3rd Generation Intel® ProcessorsIntel HD Graphics 500
Max video memoryno data8 GB
Quick Sync Video-+
Clear Video-+
Clear Video HD-+
Graphics max frequency1 GHz650 MHz
Execution Unitsno data12
InTru 3D--

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron 1017U and Celeron N3350 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported33
eDP++
DisplayPort++
HDMI++
MIPI-DSIno data+
SDVO+no data
CRT+no data

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Celeron 1017U and Celeron N3350 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno data+
OpenGLno data+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron 1017U and Celeron N3350.

PCIe version2.02.0
PCI Express lanes166
USB revisionno data2.0/3.0
Total number of SATA portsno data2
Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Portsno data2
Number of USB portsno data8
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.

Celeron 1017U 0.97
+34.7%
Celeron N3350 0.72

1017U outperforms N3350 by 35% 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%

Celeron 1017U 1508
+36.3%
Celeron N3350 1106

1017U outperforms N3350 by 36% 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%

Celeron 1017U 271
+7.1%
Celeron N3350 253

1017U outperforms N3350 by 7% 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%

Celeron 1017U 464
+11.8%
Celeron N3350 415

1017U outperforms N3350 by 12% 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%

Celeron 1017U 2201
+47.7%
Celeron N3350 1490

1017U outperforms N3350 by 48% 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%

Celeron 1017U 4155
+56.6%
Celeron N3350 2654

1017U outperforms N3350 by 57% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.

3DMark06 CPU

3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

Celeron 1017U 1719
+3.9%
Celeron N3350 1655

1017U outperforms N3350 by 4% in 3DMark06 CPU.

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%

Celeron 1017U 46.38
Celeron N3350 45.5
+1.9%

1017U outperforms N3350 by 2% 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%

Celeron 1017U 1
+17.1%
Celeron N3350 1

1017U outperforms N3350 by 17% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-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%

Celeron 1017U 0.61
+3.4%
Celeron N3350 0.59

1017U outperforms N3350 by 3% in Cinebench 11.5 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%

Celeron 1017U 0.1
Celeron N3350 0.7
+364%

N3350 outperforms 1017U by 364% 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%

Celeron 1017U 1150
+86.7%
Celeron N3350 616

1017U outperforms N3350 by 87% in WinRAR 4.0.

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%

Celeron 1017U 8
+22.1%
Celeron N3350 6

1017U outperforms N3350 by 22% 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%

Celeron 1017U 42
+28.9%
Celeron N3350 33

1017U outperforms N3350 by 29% in x264 encoding pass 1.

Geekbench 3 32-bit multi-core

Benchmark coverage: 5%

Celeron 1017U 2308
Celeron N3350 2468
+6.9%

N3350 outperforms 1017U by 7% in Geekbench 3 32-bit multi-core.

Geekbench 3 32-bit single-core

Benchmark coverage: 5%

Celeron 1017U 1367
+3%
Celeron N3350 1328

1017U outperforms N3350 by 3% in Geekbench 3 32-bit single-core.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.97 0.72
Recency 1 July 2013 1 September 2016
Chip lithography 22 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 17 Watt 6 Watt

The Celeron 1017U is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron N3350 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron 1017U and Celeron N3350, 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 Celeron 1017U
Celeron 1017U
Intel Celeron N3350
Celeron N3350

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.


2.8 65 votes

Rate Celeron 1017U on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 879 votes

Rate Celeron N3350 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron 1017U or Celeron N3350, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.