Atom 330 vs Celeron N3450

VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron N3450
2016
4 cores / 4 threads, 6 Watt
1.25
+443%
Atom 330
2008
2 cores / 4 threads, 8 Watt
0.23

Celeron N3450 outperforms Atom 330 by a whopping 443% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron N3450 and Atom 330 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking23133190
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel CeleronIntel Atom
Power efficiency19.722.72
Architecture codenameApollo Lake (2014−2016)Diamondville (2008−2009)
Release date30 August 2016 (8 years ago)2 April 2008 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$107$43

Detailed specifications

Celeron N3450 and Atom 330 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)
Threads44
Base clock speed1.1 GHz1.6 GHz
Boost clock speed2.2 GHz0.1 GHz
Bus typeno dataFSB
Bus rateno data533.33 MT/s
Multiplier1112
L1 cacheno data112 KB
L2 cache2 MB1 MB
L3 cache0 KB0 KB
Chip lithography14 nm45 nm
Die sizeno data51.9276 mm2
Maximum core temperature105 °C85 °C
Number of transistorsno data94 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage rangeno data0.9V-1.1625V

Compatibility

Information on Celeron N3450 and Atom 330 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 (Uniprocessor)
SocketFCBGA1296PBGA437
Power consumption (TDP)6 Watt8 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron N3450 and Atom 330. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE2, Intel® SSE3, Intel® SSSE3
AES-NI+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+-
Turbo Boost Technology--
Hyper-Threading Technology-+
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Smart Response-no data
Demand Based Switchingno data-
GPIO+no data
Smart Connect-no data
FSB parityno data-
HD Audio+no data
RST-no data

Security technologies

Celeron N3450 and Atom 330 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

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

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron N3450 and Atom 330 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 N3450 and Atom 330. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3, DDR4no data
Maximum memory size8 GB8 GB
Max memory channels2no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel HD Graphics 500-
Max video memory8 GB-
Quick Sync Video+-
Clear Video+-
Clear Video HD+-
Graphics max frequency700 MHz-
Execution Units12-
InTru 3D--

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron N3450 and Atom 330 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported3-
eDP+-
DisplayPort+-
HDMI+-
MIPI-DSI+-

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Celeron N3450 and Atom 330 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectX+-
OpenGL+-

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron N3450 and Atom 330.

PCIe version2.0no data
PCI Express lanes6no data
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 N3450 1.25
+443%
Atom 330 0.23

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.

Celeron N3450 1983
+446%
Atom 330 363

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 N3450 1415
+161%
Atom 330 542

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 N3450 3959
+159%
Atom 330 1530

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 N3450 2576
+212%
Atom 330 825

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 N3450 22.31
+422%
Atom 330 116.45

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.25 0.23
Recency 30 August 2016 2 April 2008
Physical cores 4 2
Chip lithography 14 nm 45 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 6 Watt 8 Watt

Celeron N3450 has a 443.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, 100% more physical cores, a 221.4% more advanced lithography process, and 33.3% lower power consumption.

The Celeron N3450 is our recommended choice as it beats the Atom 330 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron N3450 and Atom 330, 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 N3450
Celeron N3450
Intel Atom 330
Atom 330

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.


3.7 152 votes

Rate Celeron N3450 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.9 65 votes

Rate Atom 330 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron N3450 or Atom 330, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.