Processor N100 vs Celeron N3050

VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron N3050
2015
2 cores / 2 threads, 6 Watt
0.37
Processor N100
2023
4 cores / 4 threads, 6 Watt
2.43
+557%

Processor N100 outperforms Celeron N3050 by a whopping 557% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron N3050 and Processor N100 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking30421776
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel CeleronIntel Alder Lake-N
Power efficiency5.8438.33
Architecture codenameBraswell (2015−2016)Alder Lake-N (2023)
Release date1 April 2015 (9 years ago)3 January 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$107$128

Detailed specifications

Celeron N3050 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 speed1.6 GHz0.1 GHz
Boost clock speed2.16 GHz3.4 GHz
Bus typeIDIno data
L1 cacheno data96 KB (per core)
L2 cache1 MB2 MB (shared)
L3 cache0 KB6 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm10 nm
Maximum core temperature90 °C105 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+

Compatibility

Information on Celeron N3050 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 configuration1 (Uniprocessor)1
SocketFCBGA1170Intel BGA 1264
Power consumption (TDP)6 Watt6 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron N3050 and Processor N100. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI++
FMA-+
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Smart Response-no data
GPIO+no data
Smart Connect-no data
HD Audio+no data
RST-no data

Security technologies

Celeron N3050 and Processor N100 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-+
EDB+no data
Secure Boot+no data
Secure Key+no data
Identity Protection+-
OS Guard-no data
Anti-Theft-no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron N3050 and Processor N100 are enumerated here.

VT-d-+
VT-x++
VT-i-no data
EPT+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron N3050 and Processor N100. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR4, DDR5
Maximum memory size8 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Intel HD Graphics for Intel Celeron Processor N3000 SeriesIntel UHD Graphics 24EUs (Alder Lake-N) ( - 750 MHz)
Max video memory8 GBno data
Quick Sync Video+-
Clear Video+no data
Clear Video HD+no data
Graphics max frequency600 MHzno data
Execution Units12no data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron N3050 and Processor N100 integrated GPUs.

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

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Celeron N3050 and Processor N100 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectX+no data
OpenGL+no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron N3050 and Processor N100.

PCIe version2.03.0
PCI Express lanes49
USB revision2.0/3.0no data
Total number of SATA ports2no data
Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Ports2no data
Number of USB ports5no data
Integrated LAN-no data
UART+no 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 N3050 0.37
Processor N100 2.43
+557%

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 N3050 1099
Processor N100 4869
+343%

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 N3050 2064
Processor N100 11207
+443%

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 N3050 1243
Processor N100 4838
+289%

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 N3050 55.2
Processor N100 16.22
+240%

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 N3050 1
Processor N100 4
+435%

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

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

Celeron N3050 63
Processor N100 402
+542%

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 N3050 34
Processor N100 148
+335%

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 N3050 0.41
Processor N100 1.76
+329%

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 N3050 0.4
Processor N100 2.9
+590%

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 N3050 529
Processor N100 2372
+348%

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 N3050 5
Processor N100 24
+408%

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 N3050 26
Processor N100 121
+375%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.37 2.43
Integrated graphics card 0.77 2.32
Recency 1 April 2015 3 January 2023
Physical cores 2 4
Threads 2 4
Chip lithography 14 nm 10 nm

Processor N100 has a 556.8% higher aggregate performance score, 201.3% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 7 years, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and a 40% more advanced lithography process.

The Processor N100 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron N3050 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron N3050 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 N3050
Celeron N3050
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.


2.6 552 votes

Rate Celeron N3050 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 1325 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 N3050 or Processor N100, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.