Ryzen 3 3300X vs Celeron 3865U

Aggregate performance score

Celeron 3865U
2017
2 cores / 2 threads, 15 Watt
0.83
Ryzen 3 3300X
2020
4 cores / 8 threads, 65 Watt
8.45
+918%

Ryzen 3 3300X outperforms Celeron 3865U by a whopping 918% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron 3865U and Ryzen 3 3300X processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking2580894
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data30.87
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesIntel Celeronno data
Power efficiency5.2412.30
Architecture codenameKaby Lake-U (2017)Matisse (Zen 2) (2019−2020)
Release date3 January 2017 (7 years ago)24 April 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$107$120

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron 3865U and Ryzen 3 3300X 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)
Threads28
Base clock speed1.8 GHz3.8 GHz
Boost clock speed1.8 GHz4.3 GHz
Bus typeOPIno data
Bus rate4 GT/sno data
Multiplier22no data
L1 cache64K (per core)96K (per core)
L2 cache256K (per core)512K (per core)
L3 cache2 MB (shared)16 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm7 nm
Die size98.7 mm274 mm2
Maximum core temperature100 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data95 °C
Number of transistorsno data3,800 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplier-+

Compatibility

Information on Celeron 3865U and Ryzen 3 3300X 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,FPBGA1356AM4
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 3865U and Ryzen 3 3300X. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.286x MMX(+), SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, SSE4A,-64, AMD-V, AES, AVX, AVX2, FMA3, SHA, Precision Boost 2
AES-NI++
AVX++
vPro+no data
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Speed Shift+no data
My WiFi+no data
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology+no data
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Flex Memory Access+no data
Smart Response+no data
Precision Boost 2no data+

Security technologies

Celeron 3865U and Ryzen 3 3300X technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

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

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron 3865U and Ryzen 3 3300X 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 3865U and Ryzen 3 3300X. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3, DDR4DDR4-3200
Maximum memory size32 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidth34.134 GB/sno data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel HD Graphics 610no data
Max video memory32 GBno data
Quick Sync Video+-
Clear Video+no data
Clear Video HD+no data
Graphics max frequency900 MHzno data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron 3865U and Ryzen 3 3300X integrated GPUs.

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

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by Celeron 3865U and Ryzen 3 3300X 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 Ryzen 3 3300X integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectX12no data
OpenGL4.4no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron 3865U and Ryzen 3 3300X.

PCIe version2.04.0
PCI Express lanes1016

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 0.83
Ryzen 3 3300X 8.45
+918%

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 1321
Ryzen 3 3300X 13425
+916%

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
Ryzen 3 3300X 1711
+335%

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
Ryzen 3 3300X 5936
+758%

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
Ryzen 3 3300X 5856
+105%

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
Ryzen 3 3300X 25416
+368%

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
Ryzen 3 3300X 6.04
+552%

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
Ryzen 3 3300X 12
+612%

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
Ryzen 3 3300X 1071
+654%

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
Ryzen 3 3300X 195
+171%

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
Ryzen 3 3300X 2.28
+165%

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
Ryzen 3 3300X 5.9
+628%

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
Ryzen 3 3300X 62
+472%

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
Ryzen 3 3300X 234
+329%

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
Ryzen 3 3300X 7177
+548%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.83 8.45
Recency 3 January 2017 24 April 2020
Physical cores 2 4
Threads 2 8
Chip lithography 14 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 65 Watt

Celeron 3865U has 333.3% lower power consumption.

Ryzen 3 3300X, on the other hand, has a 918.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, 100% more physical cores and 300% more threads, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

The Ryzen 3 3300X is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron 3865U in performance tests.

Be aware that Celeron 3865U is a notebook processor while Ryzen 3 3300X is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron 3865U and Ryzen 3 3300X, 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
AMD Ryzen 3 3300X
Ryzen 3 3300X

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
4.4 1060 votes

Rate Ryzen 3 3300X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron 3865U or Ryzen 3 3300X, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.