Ultra 7 265F vs Celeron N3160

Primary details

Comparing Celeron N3160 and Core Ultra 7 265F processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking2652not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesIntel Celeronno data
Power efficiency17.74no data
Architecture codenameBraswell (2015−2016)Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025)
Release date15 January 2016 (8 years ago)January 2025
Launch price (MSRP)$107no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron N3160 and Core Ultra 7 265F 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)20 (Icosa-Core)
Threads420
Base clock speed1.6 GHz2.4 GHz
Boost clock speed2.24 GHz5.3 GHz
Bus typeIDIno data
L1 cacheno data112 KB (per core)
L2 cache2 MB3 MB (per core)
L3 cache0 KB30 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm3 nm
Die sizeno data243 mm2
Maximum core temperature90 °Cno data
Number of transistorsno data17,800 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data

Compatibility

Information on Celeron N3160 and Core Ultra 7 265F 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
SocketFCBGA11701851
Power consumption (TDP)6 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron N3160 and Core Ultra 7 265F. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI++
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
TSX-+
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 N3160 and Core Ultra 7 265F 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 N3160 and Core Ultra 7 265F 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 N3160 and Core Ultra 7 265F. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR5
Maximum memory size8 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel HD Graphics (Braswell)N/A
Max video memory8 GBno data
Quick Sync Video+-
Clear Video+no data
Clear Video HD+no data
Graphics max frequency640 MHzno data
Execution Units12no data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron N3160 and Core Ultra 7 265F integrated GPUs.

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

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Celeron N3160 and Core Ultra 7 265F integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectX+no data
OpenGL+no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron N3160 and Core Ultra 7 265F.

PCIe version2.05.0
PCI Express lanes420
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

Pros & cons summary


Physical cores 4 20
Threads 4 20
Chip lithography 14 nm 3 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 6 Watt 65 Watt

Celeron N3160 has 983.3% lower power consumption.

Ultra 7 265F, on the other hand, has 400% more physical cores and 400% more threads, and a 366.7% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Celeron N3160 and Core Ultra 7 265F. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Celeron N3160 is a notebook processor while Core Ultra 7 265F is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron N3160 and Core Ultra 7 265F, 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 N3160
Celeron N3160
Intel Core Ultra 7 265F
Core Ultra 7 265F

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.


4.6 195 votes

Rate Celeron N3160 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate Core Ultra 7 265F on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron N3160 or Core Ultra 7 265F, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.