N200 vs Celeron 3765U

VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron 3765U
2015
2 cores / 2 threads, 15 Watt
0.79

N200 outperforms Celeron 3765U by a whopping 305% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron 3765U and N200 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking26311613
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel Celeronno data
Power efficiency4.9850.44
Architecture codenameBroadwell (2015−2019)no data
Release date1 June 2015 (9 years ago)1 January 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$107no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron 3765U and N200 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)no data
Threads24
Base clock speed1.9 GHzno data
Boost clock speed1.9 GHzno data
Bus rate5 GT/sno data
L1 cache128 KBno data
L2 cache512 KBno data
L3 cache2 MBno data
Chip lithography14 nmno data
Die size82 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature105 °Cno data
Number of transistors1300 Millionno data
64 bit support+-
Windows 11 compatibility-no data

Compatibility

Information on Celeron 3765U and N200 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 configuration1no data
SocketFCBGA1168no data
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt6 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 3765U and N200. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2no data
AES-NI+-
AVX+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Flex Memory Access+no data
Smart Response-no data
FDI+no data
Fast Memory Access+no data

Security technologies

Celeron 3765U and N200 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-no data
EDB+no data
Secure Key+no data
Identity Protection+-
OS Guard-no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron 3765U and N200 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-d+no data
VT-x+no data
EPT+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron 3765U and N200. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3no data
Maximum memory size16 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidth25.6 GB/sno data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel HD Graphics for 5th Generation Intel Processorsno data
Quick Sync Video+-
Clear Video+no data
Graphics max frequency850 MHzno data
InTru 3D+no data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron 3765U and N200 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported3no data
eDP+no data
DisplayPort+-
HDMI+-

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Celeron 3765U and N200 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectX11.2/12no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron 3765U and N200.

PCIe version2.0no data
PCI Express lanes12no 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 3765U 0.79
N200 3.20
+305%

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 3765U 1252
N200 5083
+306%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.79 3.20
Recency 1 June 2015 1 January 2023
Threads 2 4
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 6 Watt

N200 has a 305.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, 100% more threads, and 150% lower power consumption.

The N200 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron 3765U in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron 3765U and N200, 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 3765U
Celeron 3765U
Intel N200
N200

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.


No user ratings yet.

Rate Celeron 3765U on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 39 votes

Rate N200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron 3765U or N200, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.