Processor N100 vs Celeron M U3400

VS

Primary details

Comparing Celeron M U3400 and Processor N100 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the rankingnot rated1782
Place by popularitynot in top-10065
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel Celeron MIntel Alder Lake-N
Power efficiencyno data37.08
Architecture codenameArrandale (2010−2011)Alder Lake-N (2023)
Release date24 May 2010 (14 years ago)3 January 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$128

Detailed specifications

Celeron M U3400 and Processor N100 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 speedno data0.1 GHz
Boost clock speed1.06 GHz3.4 GHz
Bus rate2500 MHzno data
L1 cacheno data96 KB (per core)
L2 cache512 KB2 MB (shared)
L3 cache2 MB6 MB (shared)
Chip lithography32 nm10 nm
Die size81+114 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature105 °C105 °C
Number of transistors382+177 Millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+

Compatibility

Information on Celeron M U3400 and Processor N100 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 configurationno data1
SocketBGA1288Intel BGA 1264
Power consumption (TDP)18 Watt6 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M U3400 and Processor N100. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI-+
FMA-+
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Flex Memory Access+no data
Fast Memory Access+no data

Security technologies

Celeron M U3400 and Processor N100 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+
EDB+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron M U3400 and Processor N100 are enumerated here.

VT-dno data+
VT-x++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron M U3400 and Processor N100. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR4, DDR5

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataIntel UHD Graphics 24EUs (Alder Lake-N)

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron M U3400 and Processor N100.

PCIe versionno data3.0
PCI Express lanesno data9

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.



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 M U3400 1205
Processor N100 4869
+304%

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 M U3400 2317
Processor N100 11207
+384%

3DMark06 CPU

3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.

Celeron M U3400 988
Processor N100 4838
+390%

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 M U3400 62.2
Processor N100 16.22
+283%

Pros & cons summary


Recency 24 May 2010 3 January 2023
Physical cores 2 4
Threads 2 4
Chip lithography 32 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 18 Watt 6 Watt

Processor N100 has an age advantage of 12 years, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, a 220% more advanced lithography process, and 200% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Celeron M U3400 and Processor N100. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M U3400 and Processor N100, 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 M U3400
Celeron M U3400
Intel Processor N100
Processor N100

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.


2.8 4 votes

Rate Celeron M U3400 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 1198 votes

Rate Processor N100 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron M U3400 or Processor N100, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.