Celeron N3350 vs N3150

#ad
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregated performance score

Celeron N3150
2015
4 cores / 4 threads
0.77
+6.9%

N3150 outperforms N3350 by 7% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron N3150 and Celeron N3350 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking25172570
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel CeleronIntel Celeron
Architecture codenameBraswell (2015−2016)Apollo Lake (2016)
Release date1 April 2015 (9 years ago)1 September 2016 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$107$24
Current price$408 (3.8x MSRP)$251 (10.5x MSRP)

Detailed specifications

Celeron N3150 and Celeron N3350 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads42
Base clock speed1.6 GHz1.1 GHz
Boost clock speed2.08 GHz2.4 GHz
L2 cache2 MB2 MB
L3 cache0 KB0 KB
Chip lithography14 nm14 nm
Maximum core temperature90 °C105 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplierNoNo

Compatibility

Information on Celeron N3150 and Celeron N3350 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
SocketFCBGA1170FCBGA1296
Power consumption (TDP)6 Watt6 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron N3150 and Celeron N3350. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Turbo Boost Technology--
Hyper-Threading Technology--
Idle States++
Thermal Monitoring++
SIPP--
Smart Response--
GPIO++
Smart Connect--
StatusDiscontinuedLaunched
HD Audio++
RST--

Security technologies

Celeron N3150 and Celeron N3350 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-+
EDB++
Secure Boot++
Secure Key++
MPXno data+
Identity Protection++
OS Guard-+
Anti-Theft--

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron N3150 and Celeron N3350 are enumerated here.

VT-d-+
VT-x++
VT-i--
EPT++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron N3150 and Celeron N3350. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3, DDR4
Maximum memory size8 GB8 GB
Max memory channels22
ECC memory support--

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel® HD Graphics for Intel® Celeron® Processor N3000 SeriesIntel HD Graphics 500
Max video memory8 GB8 GB
Quick Sync Video++
Clear Video++
Clear Video HD++
Graphics max frequency640 MHz650 MHz
Execution Units1212
InTru 3D--

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron N3150 and Celeron N3350 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported33
eDP++
DisplayPort++
HDMI++
MIPI-DSIno data+

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Celeron N3150 and Celeron N3350 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectX++
OpenGL++

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron N3150 and Celeron N3350.

PCIe version2.02.0
PCI Express lanes46
USB revision2.0/3.02.0/3.0
Total number of SATA ports22
Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Ports22
Number of USB ports58
Integrated LAN--
UART++

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 N3150 0.77
+6.9%
Celeron N3350 0.72

N3150 outperforms N3350 by 7% 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 N3150 1191
+7.7%
Celeron N3350 1106

N3150 outperforms N3350 by 8% 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 N3150 162
Celeron N3350 253
+56.2%

N3350 outperforms N3150 by 56% 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 N3150 494
+18.8%
Celeron N3350 416

N3150 outperforms N3350 by 19% 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 N3150 1085
Celeron N3350 1490
+37.3%

N3350 outperforms N3150 by 37% 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 N3150 3624
+36.5%
Celeron N3350 2654

N3150 outperforms N3350 by 37% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

Celeron N3150 2053
+24.1%
Celeron N3350 1655

N3150 outperforms N3350 by 24% in 3DMark06 CPU.

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 N3150 30.11
+51.1%
Celeron N3350 45.5

N3350 outperforms N3150 by 51% 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 N3150 1
+31.5%
Celeron N3350 1

N3150 outperforms N3350 by 32% 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 N3150 118
+38.8%
Celeron N3350 85

N3150 outperforms N3350 by 39% 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 N3150 32
Celeron N3350 46
+43.8%

N3350 outperforms N3150 by 44% 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 N3150 0.41
Celeron N3350 0.59
+43.9%

N3350 outperforms N3150 by 44% 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 N3150 0.8
+26.2%
Celeron N3350 0.7

N3150 outperforms N3350 by 26% 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 N3150 915
+48.5%
Celeron N3350 616

N3150 outperforms N3350 by 49% 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 N3150 45
+37.8%
Celeron N3350 33

N3150 outperforms N3350 by 38% 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 N3150 9
+44.5%
Celeron N3350 6

N3150 outperforms N3350 by 45% in x264 encoding pass 2.

Geekbench 3 32-bit single-core

Benchmark coverage: 5%

Celeron N3150 850
Celeron N3350 1328
+56.2%

N3350 outperforms N3150 by 56% in Geekbench 3 32-bit single-core.

Geekbench 3 32-bit multi-core

Benchmark coverage: 5%

Celeron N3150 2824
+14.4%
Celeron N3350 2468

N3150 outperforms N3350 by 14% in Geekbench 3 32-bit multi-core.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.77 0.72
Recency 1 April 2015 1 September 2016
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Cost $107 $24

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Celeron N3150 and Celeron N3350.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron N3150 and Celeron N3350, 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 N3150
Celeron N3150
Intel Celeron N3350
Celeron N3350

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.


3.7 33 votes

Rate Celeron N3150 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 873 votes

Rate Celeron N3350 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron N3150 or Celeron N3350, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.