Celeron N3450 vs 3865U

#ad
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregated performance score

Celeron 3865U
2017
2 cores / 2 threads
0.85

N3450 outperforms 3865U by an impressive 51% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron 3865U and Celeron N3450 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking24472169
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel CeleronIntel Celeron
Architecture codenameKaby Lake-UApollo Lake (2016)
Release date3 January 2017 (7 years ago)1 September 2016 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$107$107
Current price$296 (2.8x MSRP)$242 (2.3x MSRP)

Detailed specifications

Celeron 3865U 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 cores2 (Dual-core)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads24
Base clock speed1.8 GHz1.1 GHz
Boost clock speed1.8 GHz2.2 GHz
L1 cache64K (per core)no data
L2 cache256K (per core)2 MB
L3 cache2 MB (shared)0 KB
Chip lithography14 nm14 nm
Die size98.7 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature100 °C105 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplierNoNo

Compatibility

Information on Celeron 3865U 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 configuration11
SocketFCBGA1356,FPBGA1356FCBGA1296
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt6 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 3865U and Celeron N3450. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

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

Security technologies

Celeron 3865U and Celeron N3450 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-+
EDB++
Secure Bootno data+
Secure Key++
MPX++
Identity Protectionno data+
SGXYes with Intel® MEno data
OS Guard++
Anti-Theftno data-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron 3865U and Celeron N3450 are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron 3865U and Celeron N3450. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3, DDR4DDR3, DDR4
Maximum memory size32 GB8 GB
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidth34.1 GB/sno data
ECC memory support--

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Intel HD Graphics 610Intel HD Graphics 500
Max video memory32 GB8 GB
Quick Sync Video++
Clear Video++
Clear Video HD++
Graphics max frequency900 MHz700 MHz
Execution Unitsno data12

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron 3865U and Celeron N3450 integrated GPUs.

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

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by Celeron 3865U and Celeron N3450 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 N3450 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectX12+
OpenGL4.4+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron 3865U and Celeron N3450.

PCIe version2.02.0
PCI Express lanes106
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 3865U 0.85
Celeron N3450 1.28
+50.6%

N3450 outperforms 3865U by 51% 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 3865U 1320
Celeron N3450 1984
+50.3%

N3450 outperforms 3865U by 50% 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 3865U 392
+64%
Celeron N3450 239

3865U outperforms N3450 by 64% 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 3865U 691
+3.8%
Celeron N3450 666

3865U outperforms N3450 by 4% 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 3865U 2853
+102%
Celeron N3450 1415

3865U outperforms N3450 by 102% 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 3865U 5425
+37%
Celeron N3450 3959

3865U outperforms N3450 by 37% 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%

Celeron 3865U 39.36
Celeron N3450 22.31
+76.4%

3865U outperforms N3450 by 76% 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 3865U 2
Celeron N3450 2
+12.7%

N3450 outperforms 3865U by 13% 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%

Celeron 3865U 142
Celeron N3450 143
+0.7%

N3450 outperforms 3865U by 1% 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%

Celeron 3865U 72
+61.8%
Celeron N3450 45

3865U outperforms N3450 by 62% 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%

Celeron 3865U 0.86
+62.3%
Celeron N3450 0.53

3865U outperforms N3450 by 62% 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 3865U 0.8
Celeron N3450 1.2
+48.1%

N3450 outperforms 3865U by 48% 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 3865U 1108
+8.6%
Celeron N3450 1020

3865U outperforms N3450 by 9% in WinRAR 4.0.

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 3865U 54
Celeron N3450 58
+7%

N3450 outperforms 3865U by 7% in x264 encoding pass 1.

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 3865U 11
Celeron N3450 12
+11.1%

N3450 outperforms 3865U by 11% in x264 encoding pass 2.

Geekbench 3 32-bit single-core

Benchmark coverage: 5%

Celeron 3865U 1843
+53.3%
Celeron N3450 1202

3865U outperforms N3450 by 53% in Geekbench 3 32-bit single-core.

Geekbench 3 32-bit multi-core

Benchmark coverage: 5%

Celeron 3865U 3224
Celeron N3450 3958
+22.8%

N3450 outperforms 3865U by 23% in Geekbench 3 32-bit multi-core.

Geekbench 4.0 64-bit multi-core

Benchmark coverage: 2%

Celeron 3865U 3564
Celeron N3450 3953
+10.9%

N3450 outperforms 3865U by 11% in Geekbench 4.0 64-bit multi-core.

Geekbench 4.0 64-bit single-core

Benchmark coverage: 2%

Celeron 3865U 2182
+53.4%
Celeron N3450 1422

3865U outperforms N3450 by 53% in Geekbench 4.0 64-bit single-core.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.85 1.28
Integrated graphics card 1.84 0.75
Recency 3 January 2017 1 September 2016
Physical cores 2 4
Threads 2 4
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 6 Watt

The Celeron N3450 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron 3865U in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron 3865U 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 Celeron 3865U
Celeron 3865U
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.


3.3 97 votes

Rate Celeron 3865U 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 Celeron 3865U or Celeron N3450, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.