Celeron N2930 vs 3865U

VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron 3865U
2017
2 cores / 2 threads, 15 Watt
0.84
+31.3%
Celeron N2930
2014
4 cores / 4 threads, 7 Watt
0.64

Celeron 3865U outperforms Celeron N2930 by a substantial 31% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron 3865U and Celeron N2930 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking25902771
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel CeleronIntel Celeron
Power efficiency5.308.66
Architecture codenameKaby Lake-U (2017)Bay Trail-M (2013−2014)
Release date3 January 2017 (7 years ago)23 February 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$107no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron 3865U and Celeron N2930 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 GHz1.83 GHz
Boost clock speed1.8 GHz2.16 GHz
Bus typeOPIno data
Bus rate4 GT/sno data
Multiplier22no data
L1 cache64K (per core)56K (per core)
L2 cache256K (per core)512K (per core)
L3 cache2 MB (shared)0 KB
Chip lithography14 nm22 nm
Die size98.7 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature100 °C100 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Celeron 3865U and Celeron N2930 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
SocketFCBGA1356,FPBGA1356FCBGA1170
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt7.5 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 3865U and Celeron N2930. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2no data
AES-NI+-
AVX+-
vPro+no data
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Speed Shift+no data
My WiFi+no data
Turbo Boost Technology--
Hyper-Threading Technology+-
Idle States++
Thermal Monitoring+-
Flex Memory Access+no data
Smart Response+no data
Smart Connectno data+
RSTno data-

Security technologies

Celeron 3865U and Celeron N2930 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-no data
EDB++
Secure Key++
MPX+-
SGXYes with Intel® MEno data
OS Guard+no data
Anti-Theftno data-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron 3865U and Celeron N2930 are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron 3865U and Celeron N2930. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3, DDR4DDR3
Maximum memory size32 GB8 GB
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidth34.134 GB/sno data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Intel HD Graphics 610Intel HD Graphics for Intel Atom Processor Z3700 Series
Max video memory32 GBno data
Quick Sync Video++
Clear Video+no data
Clear Video HD+-
Graphics max frequency900 MHz854 MHz

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron 3865U and Celeron N2930 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported32
eDP+no data
DisplayPort+-
HDMI+-
DVI+no data

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by Celeron 3865U and Celeron N2930 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

4K resolution support+no data
Max resolution over HDMI 1.44096x2304@24Hzno data
Max resolution over eDP4096x2304@60Hzno data
Max resolution over DisplayPort4096x2304@60Hzno data

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Celeron 3865U and Celeron N2930 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectX12no data
OpenGL4.4no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron 3865U and Celeron N2930.

PCIe version2.02.0
PCI Express lanes104
USB revisionno data3.0 and 2.0
Total number of SATA portsno data2
Number of USB portsno data5

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 3865U 0.84
+31.3%
Celeron N2930 0.64

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 3865U 1329
+30.7%
Celeron N2930 1017

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 3865U 393
+143%
Celeron N2930 162

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 3865U 692
+45.4%
Celeron N2930 476

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.

Celeron 3865U 2853
+152%
Celeron N2930 1132

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.

Celeron 3865U 5425
+39.8%
Celeron N2930 3880

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.

Celeron 3865U 39.36
Celeron N2930 27.25
+44.4%

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.

Celeron 3865U 2
+5.7%
Celeron N2930 2

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

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

Celeron 3865U 142
+10.1%
Celeron N2930 129

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.

Celeron 3865U 72
+106%
Celeron N2930 35

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.

Celeron 3865U 0.86
+110%
Celeron N2930 0.41

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.

Celeron 3865U 0.8
+238%
Celeron N2930 0.2

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.

Celeron 3865U 1108
Celeron N2930 1181
+6.6%

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.  

Celeron 3865U 11
+16.1%
Celeron N2930 9

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.  

Celeron 3865U 54
+15.9%
Celeron N2930 47

Geekbench 3 32-bit multi-core

Celeron 3865U 3224
+19.3%
Celeron N2930 2703

Geekbench 3 32-bit single-core

Celeron 3865U 1843
+120%
Celeron N2930 839

Geekbench 2

Celeron 3865U 3627
+22.2%
Celeron N2930 2968

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.84 0.64
Integrated graphics card 1.85 0.77
Recency 3 January 2017 23 February 2014
Physical cores 2 4
Threads 2 4
Chip lithography 14 nm 22 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 7 Watt

Celeron 3865U has a 31.3% higher aggregate performance score, 140.3% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 2 years, and a 57.1% more advanced lithography process.

Celeron N2930, on the other hand, has 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and 114.3% lower power consumption.

The Celeron 3865U is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron N2930 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron 3865U and Celeron N2930, 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 3865U
Celeron 3865U
Intel Celeron N2930
Celeron N2930

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.


3.3 116 votes

Rate Celeron 3865U on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 56 votes

Rate Celeron N2930 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron 3865U or Celeron N2930, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.