Celeron N2930 vs N3450

#ad
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregated performance score

Celeron N3450
2016
4 cores / 4 threads
1.28
+93.9%

N3450 outperforms N2930 by an impressive 94% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron N3450 and Celeron N2930 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking21692620
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel CeleronIntel Celeron
Architecture codenameApollo Lake (2016)Bay Trail-M (2013−2014)
Release date1 September 2016 (7 years ago)23 February 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$107no data
Current price$242 (2.3x MSRP)$820

Detailed specifications

Celeron N3450 and Celeron N2930 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)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads44
Base clock speed1.1 GHz1.83 GHz
Boost clock speed2.2 GHz2.16 GHz
L1 cacheno data56K (per core)
L2 cache2 MB512K (per core)
L3 cache0 KB0 KB
Chip lithography14 nm22 nm
Maximum core temperature105 °C100 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplierNoNo

Compatibility

Information on Celeron N3450 and Celeron N2930 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
SocketFCBGA1296FCBGA1170
Power consumption (TDP)6 Watt7.5 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron N3450 and Celeron N2930. 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+no data
SIPP-no data
Smart Response-no data
GPIO+no data
Smart Connect-+
StatusDiscontinuedLaunched
HD Audio+no data
RST--

Security technologies

Celeron N3450 and Celeron N2930 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

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

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron N3450 and Celeron N2930 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 Celeron N2930. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3, DDR4DDR3
Maximum memory size8 GB8 GB
Max memory channels22
ECC memory support-no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel HD Graphics 500Intel® HD Graphics for Intel Atom® Processor Z3700 Series
Max video memory8 GBno data
Quick Sync Video++
Clear Video+no data
Clear Video HD+-
Graphics max frequency700 MHz854 MHz
Execution Units12no data
InTru 3D--

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron N3450 and Celeron N2930 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported32
eDP+no data
DisplayPort+no data
HDMI+no data
MIPI-DSI+no data

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Celeron N3450 and Celeron N2930 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectX+no data
OpenGL+no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron N3450 and Celeron N2930.

PCIe version2.02.0
PCI Express lanes64
USB revision2.0/3.03.0 and 2.0
Total number of SATA ports22
Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Ports2no data
Number of USB ports85
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 1.28
+93.9%
Celeron N2930 0.66

N3450 outperforms N2930 by 94% 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 N3450 1986
+95.3%
Celeron N2930 1017

N3450 outperforms N2930 by 95% 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 N3450 240
+55.8%
Celeron N2930 154

N3450 outperforms N2930 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 N3450 665
+45.5%
Celeron N2930 457

N3450 outperforms N2930 by 46% 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 N3450 1415
+25.1%
Celeron N2930 1132

N3450 outperforms N2930 by 25% 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 N3450 3959
+2%
Celeron N2930 3880

N3450 outperforms N2930 by 2% 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 N3450 2576
+16.4%
Celeron N2930 2214

N3450 outperforms N2930 by 16% 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 N3450 22.31
+22.1%
Celeron N2930 27.25

N2930 outperforms N3450 by 22% 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 N3450 2
+19.1%
Celeron N2930 2

N3450 outperforms N2930 by 19% 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 N3450 143
+10.9%
Celeron N2930 129

N3450 outperforms N2930 by 11% 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 N3450 45
+27.1%
Celeron N2930 35

N3450 outperforms N2930 by 27% 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 N3450 0.53
+29.3%
Celeron N2930 0.41

N3450 outperforms N2930 by 29% 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 N3450 1.2
+400%
Celeron N2930 0.2

N3450 outperforms N2930 by 400% 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 N3450 1020
Celeron N2930 1181
+15.8%

N2930 outperforms N3450 by 16% 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 N3450 58
+24%
Celeron N2930 47

N3450 outperforms N2930 by 24% 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 N3450 12
+29%
Celeron N2930 9

N3450 outperforms N2930 by 29% in x264 encoding pass 2.

Geekbench 3 32-bit single-core

Benchmark coverage: 5%

Celeron N3450 1202
+43.3%
Celeron N2930 839

N3450 outperforms N2930 by 43% in Geekbench 3 32-bit single-core.

Geekbench 3 32-bit multi-core

Benchmark coverage: 5%

Celeron N3450 3958
+46.4%
Celeron N2930 2703

N3450 outperforms N2930 by 46% in Geekbench 3 32-bit multi-core.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.28 0.66
Recency 1 September 2016 23 February 2014
Chip lithography 14 nm 22 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 6 Watt 7 Watt

The Celeron N3450 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron N2930 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron N3450 and Celeron N2930, 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 Celeron N2930
Celeron N2930

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.


3.7 147 votes

Rate Celeron N3450 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 54 votes

Rate Celeron N2930 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron N3450 or Celeron N2930, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.