Celeron N4020 vs 3865U

#ad
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregated performance score

Celeron 3865U
2017
2 cores / 2 threads
0.85

N4020 outperforms 3865U by 18% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron 3865U and Celeron N4020 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking24472342
Place by popularitynot in top-10041
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel CeleronIntel Gemini Lake
Architecture codenameKaby Lake-UGemini Lake Refresh (2019)
Release date3 January 2017 (7 years ago)4 November 2019 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$107no data
Current price$296 (2.8x MSRP)$236

Detailed specifications

Celeron 3865U and Celeron N4020 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 speed1.8 GHz1.1 GHz
Boost clock speed1.8 GHz2.8 GHz
Bus support4 GT/sno data
L1 cache64K (per core)no data
L2 cache256K (per core)4 MB
L3 cache2 MB (shared)4 MB
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 N4020 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,FPBGA1356FCBGA1090
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt6 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 3865U and Celeron N4020. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2Intel® SSE4.2
AES-NI++
AVX+no data
vPro+no data
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Speed Shift+-
My WiFi+no data
Turbo Boost Technology--
Hyper-Threading Technology+-
TSX-no data
Idle States++
Thermal Monitoring++
Flex Memory Access+no data
SIPP-no data
Smart Response+-
GPIOno data+
Turbo Boost Max 3.0no data-
StatusDiscontinuedDiscontinued

Security technologies

Celeron 3865U and Celeron N4020 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-no data
EDB++
Secure Key++
MPX++
Identity Protectionno data+
SGXYes with Intel® MEYes with Intel® ME
OS Guard++
Anti-Theftno data-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron 3865U and Celeron N4020 are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron 3865U and Celeron N4020. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3, DDR4, DDR3DDR4
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 UHD Graphics 600
Max video memory32 GB8 GB
Quick Sync Video++
Clear Video+no data
Clear Video HD+no data
Graphics max frequency900 MHz650 MHz
Execution Unitsno data12

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron 3865U and Celeron N4020 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 N4020 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

4K resolution support++
Max resolution over HDMI 1.44096x2304@24Hz4096x2160@30Hz
Max resolution over eDP4096x2304@60Hz4096x2160@60Hz
Max resolution over DisplayPort4096x2304@60Hz4096x2160@60Hz

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Celeron 3865U and Celeron N4020 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectX1212
OpenGL4.44.4

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron 3865U and Celeron N4020.

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 N4020 1.00
+17.6%

N4020 outperforms 3865U by 18% 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 1316
Celeron N4020 1550
+17.8%

N4020 outperforms 3865U by 18% 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
+15%
Celeron N4020 341

3865U outperforms N4020 by 15% 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
+27%
Celeron N4020 544

3865U outperforms N4020 by 27% 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
+30.6%
Celeron N4020 2184

3865U outperforms N4020 by 31% 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
+22.5%
Celeron N4020 4427

3865U outperforms N4020 by 23% 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 N4020 29.66
+32.7%

3865U outperforms N4020 by 33% 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 N4020 2
+3%

N4020 outperforms 3865U by 3% 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
+11.7%
Celeron N4020 127

3865U outperforms N4020 by 12% 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
Celeron N4020 74
+2.4%

N4020 outperforms 3865U by 2% 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
Celeron N4020 0.94
+9.3%

N4020 outperforms 3865U by 9% 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 N4020 1
+17.3%

N4020 outperforms 3865U by 17% 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
+44.6%
Celeron N4020 766

3865U outperforms N4020 by 45% 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
+8.6%
Celeron N4020 50

3865U outperforms N4020 by 9% 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
+8.3%
Celeron N4020 10

3865U outperforms N4020 by 8% in x264 encoding pass 2.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.85 1.00
Integrated graphics card 1.84 0.86
Recency 3 January 2017 4 November 2019
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 6 Watt

The Celeron N4020 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 N4020, 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 N4020
Celeron N4020

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 96 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 1473 votes

Rate Celeron N4020 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 N4020, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.