Celeron N3160 vs 1037U

Aggregate performance score

Celeron 1037U
2013
2 cores / 2 threads, 17 Watt
0.63
Celeron N3160
2016
4 cores / 4 threads, 6 Watt
0.75
+19%

Celeron N3160 outperforms Celeron 1037U by a moderate 19% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron 1037U and Celeron N3160 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking27682652
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel CeleronIntel Celeron
Power efficiency3.5117.74
Architecture codenameIvy Bridge (2012−2013)Braswell (2015−2016)
Release date20 January 2013 (11 years ago)15 January 2016 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$86$107

Detailed specifications

Celeron 1037U and Celeron N3160 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 speed1.8 GHz1.6 GHz
Boost clock speed1.8 GHz2.24 GHz
Bus typeno dataIDI
Bus rate5 GT/sno data
L1 cache64K (per core)no data
L2 cache256K (per core)2 MB
L3 cache2 MB (shared)0 KB
Chip lithography22 nm14 nm
Die size118 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature105 °C90 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)105 °Cno data
Number of transistors1,400 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Celeron 1037U and Celeron N3160 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 (Uniprocessor)
SocketFCBGA1023FCBGA1170
Power consumption (TDP)17 Watt6 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 1037U and Celeron N3160. 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
Smart Responseno data-
GPIOno data+
Smart Connectno data-
FDI+no data
Fast Memory Access+no data
HD Audiono data+
RSTno data-

Security technologies

Celeron 1037U and Celeron N3160 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

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

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron 1037U and Celeron N3160 are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron 1037U and Celeron N3160. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3
Maximum memory size32 GB8 GB
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidth25.6 GB/sno data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel® HD Graphics for 3rd Generation Intel® ProcessorsIntel HD Graphics (Braswell)
Max video memoryno data8 GB
Quick Sync Video-+
Clear Videono data+
Clear Video HD-+
Graphics max frequency1 GHz640 MHz
Execution Unitsno data12
InTru 3D--

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron 1037U and Celeron N3160 integrated GPUs.

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

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Celeron 1037U and Celeron N3160 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno data+
OpenGLno data+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron 1037U and Celeron N3160.

PCIe version2.02.0
PCI Express lanes164
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 data5
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 1037U 0.63
Celeron N3160 0.75
+19%

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.

Celeron 1037U 998
Celeron N3160 1192
+19.4%

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.

Celeron 1037U 310
+82.4%
Celeron N3160 170

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.

Celeron 1037U 525
+1.5%
Celeron N3160 517

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.63 0.75
Recency 20 January 2013 15 January 2016
Physical cores 2 4
Threads 2 4
Chip lithography 22 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 17 Watt 6 Watt

Celeron N3160 has a 19% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, a 57.1% more advanced lithography process, and 183.3% lower power consumption.

The Celeron N3160 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron 1037U in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron 1037U and Celeron N3160, 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 1037U
Celeron 1037U
Intel Celeron N3160
Celeron N3160

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.


3.5 75 votes

Rate Celeron 1037U on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.6 195 votes

Rate Celeron N3160 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron 1037U or Celeron N3160, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.