Ryzen 3 3100 vs Celeron N3350

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron N3350
2016
2 cores / 2 threads, 6 Watt
0.72

Ryzen 3 3100 outperforms Celeron N3350 by a whopping 971% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron N3350 and Ryzen 3 3100 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking2587884
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data30.78
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesIntel CeleronMatisse (Ryzen 3000 Desktop)
Architecture codenameApollo Lake (2016)Matisse (Zen 2) (2019−2020)
Release date1 September 2016 (7 years ago)24 April 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$24$99
Current price$251 (10.5x MSRP)$140 (1.4x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron N3350 and Ryzen 3 3100 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 speed1.1 GHz3.6 GHz
Boost clock speed2.4 GHz3.9 GHz
L1 cacheno data96K (per core)
L2 cache2 MB512K (per core)
L3 cache0 KB16 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm7 nm
Die sizeno data74 mm2
Maximum core temperature105 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data95 °C
Number of transistorsno data3,800 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplierNoYes

Compatibility

Information on Celeron N3350 and Ryzen 3 3100 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
SocketFCBGA1296AM4
Power consumption (TDP)6 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron N3350 and Ryzen 3 3100. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataDDR4-3200 RAM, PCIe 4, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, BMI2, ABM, FMA, ADX, SMEP, SMAP, SMT, CPB, AES-NI, RDRAND, RDSEED, SHA, SME
AES-NI++
FMAno data+
AVXno data+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+no data
SIPP-no data
Smart Response-no data
GPIO+no data
Smart Connect-no data
StatusLaunchedno data
HD Audio+no data
RST-no data

Security technologies

Celeron N3350 and Ryzen 3 3100 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

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

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron N3350 and Ryzen 3 3100 are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron N3350 and Ryzen 3 3100. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3, DDR4DDR4
Maximum memory size8 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data
ECC memory support-no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel HD Graphics 500no data
Max video memory8 GBno data
Quick Sync Video+no data
Clear Video+no data
Clear Video HD+no data
Graphics max frequency650 MHzno data
Execution Units12no data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron N3350 and Ryzen 3 3100 integrated GPUs.

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

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Celeron N3350 and Ryzen 3 3100 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectX+no data
OpenGL+no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron N3350 and Ryzen 3 3100.

PCIe version2.04.0
PCI Express lanes616
USB revision2.0/3.0no data
Total number of SATA ports2no data
Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Ports2no data
Number of USB ports8no 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 N3350 0.72
Ryzen 3 3100 7.71
+971%

Ryzen 3 3100 outperforms Celeron N3350 by 971% 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 N3350 1106
Ryzen 3 3100 11928
+978%

Ryzen 3 3100 outperforms Celeron N3350 by 978% 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 N3350 253
Ryzen 3 3100 1482
+486%

Ryzen 3 3100 outperforms Celeron N3350 by 486% 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 N3350 415
Ryzen 3 3100 5097
+1128%

Ryzen 3 3100 outperforms Celeron N3350 by 1128% 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 N3350 1490
Ryzen 3 3100 5181
+248%

Ryzen 3 3100 outperforms Celeron N3350 by 248% 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 N3350 2654
Ryzen 3 3100 23406
+782%

Ryzen 3 3100 outperforms Celeron N3350 by 782% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.

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 N3350 45.5
Ryzen 3 3100 6.58
+591%

Celeron N3350 outperforms Ryzen 3 3100 by 591% 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 N3350 1
Ryzen 3 3100 11
+885%

Ryzen 3 3100 outperforms Celeron N3350 by 885% 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 N3350 85
Ryzen 3 3100 991
+1066%

Ryzen 3 3100 outperforms Celeron N3350 by 1066% 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 N3350 46
Ryzen 3 3100 178
+287%

Ryzen 3 3100 outperforms Celeron N3350 by 287% 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 N3350 0.59
Ryzen 3 3100 1.99
+237%

Ryzen 3 3100 outperforms Celeron N3350 by 237% 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 N3350 0.7
Ryzen 3 3100 5.4
+731%

Ryzen 3 3100 outperforms Celeron N3350 by 731% 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 N3350 616
Ryzen 3 3100 4848
+687%

Ryzen 3 3100 outperforms Celeron N3350 by 687% in WinRAR 4.0.

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 N3350 6
Ryzen 3 3100 59
+845%

Ryzen 3 3100 outperforms Celeron N3350 by 845% in x264 encoding pass 2.

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 N3350 33
Ryzen 3 3100 203
+523%

Ryzen 3 3100 outperforms Celeron N3350 by 523% in x264 encoding pass 1.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.72 7.71
Recency 1 September 2016 24 April 2020
Physical cores 2 4
Threads 2 8
Cost $24 $99
Chip lithography 14 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 6 Watt 65 Watt

The Ryzen 3 3100 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron N3350 in performance tests.

Be aware that Celeron N3350 is a notebook processor while Ryzen 3 3100 is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron N3350 and Ryzen 3 3100, 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 N3350
Celeron N3350
AMD Ryzen 3 3100
Ryzen 3 3100

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.


2.8 884 votes

Rate Celeron N3350 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 1547 votes

Rate Ryzen 3 3100 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron N3350 or Ryzen 3 3100, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.