i3-N305 vs Celeron N6211

VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron N6211
2022
2 cores / 2 threads, 6 Watt
1.41
Core i3-N305
2023
8 cores / 8 threads, 15 Watt
6.28
+345%

Core i3-N305 outperforms Celeron N6211 by a whopping 345% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron N6211 and Core i3-N305 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking22121074
Place by popularitynot in top-10078
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.33no data
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
SeriesElkhart Lakeno data
Power efficiency20.5339.62
Architecture codenameElkhart Lake (2022)Alder Lake-N (2023)
Release date17 July 2022 (2 years ago)3 January 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$54$309

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron N6211 and Core i3-N305 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)8 (Octa-Core)
Threads28
Base clock speed1.2 GHz0.1 GHz
Boost clock speed3 GHz3.8 GHz
L1 cacheno data96 KB (per core)
L2 cache1.5 MB2 MB (per module)
L3 cacheno data6 MB (shared)
Chip lithography10 nmIntel 7 nm
Maximum core temperature70 °C105 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility++

Compatibility

Information on Celeron N6211 and Core i3-N305 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 configurationno data1
SocketBGA1493FCBGA1264
Power consumption (TDP)6.5 Watt15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron N6211 and Core i3-N305. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2
AES-NI++
FMA-+
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Speed Shiftno data+
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Thermal Monitoring-+
GPIOno data+

Security technologies

Celeron N6211 and Core i3-N305 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+
OS Guardno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron N6211 and Core i3-N305 are enumerated here.

VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron N6211 and Core i3-N305. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4DDR4, DDR5
Maximum memory sizeno data16 GB
Max memory channelsno data1

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Intel UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 16 EU) (250 - 750 MHz)Intel UHD Graphics
Quick Sync Video-+
Graphics max frequencyno data1.25 GHz
Execution Unitsno data32

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron N6211 and Core i3-N305 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data3

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by Celeron N6211 and Core i3-N305 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

4K resolution supportno data+
Max resolution over HDMI 1.4no data4096 x 2160@60Hz
Max resolution over DisplayPortno data4096 x 2160@60Hz

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Celeron N6211 and Core i3-N305 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno data12.1
OpenGLno data4.6

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron N6211 and Core i3-N305.

PCIe versionno data3.0
PCI Express lanesno data9
USB revisionno data2.0/3.2

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 N6211 1.41
i3-N305 6.28
+345%

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 N6211 2245
i3-N305 9978
+344%

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 N6211 2696
i3-N305 5651
+110%

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 N6211 4693
i3-N305 26169
+458%

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 N6211 49.66
i3-N305 35.77
+38.8%

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.

Celeron N6211 2
i3-N305 11
+587%

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.

Celeron N6211 128
i3-N305 829
+548%

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.

Celeron N6211 76
i3-N305 165
+117%

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.

Celeron N6211 0.97
i3-N305 2.05
+111%

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.

Celeron N6211 1
i3-N305 5.5
+461%

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.

Celeron N6211 731
i3-N305 3377
+362%

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.  

Celeron N6211 10
i3-N305 56
+459%

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.  

Celeron N6211 45
i3-N305 203
+348%

Geekbench 5.5 Multi-Core

Celeron N6211 844
i3-N305 4644
+450%

Blender(-)

Celeron N6211 3767
+540%
i3-N305 589

Geekbench 5.5 Single-Core

Celeron N6211 556
i3-N305 1071
+92.6%

7-Zip Single

Celeron N6211 2593
i3-N305 4105
+58.3%

7-Zip

Celeron N6211 3974
i3-N305 21239
+434%

WebXPRT 3

Celeron N6211 89
i3-N305 185
+108%

WebXPRT 4 Overall

Celeron N6211 63
i3-N305 145
+130%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.41 6.28
Integrated graphics card 1.39 5.58
Recency 17 July 2022 3 January 2023
Physical cores 2 8
Threads 2 8
Power consumption (TDP) 6 Watt 15 Watt

Celeron N6211 has 150% lower power consumption.

i3-N305, on the other hand, has a 345.4% higher aggregate performance score, 301.4% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 5 months, and 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads.

The Core i3-N305 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron N6211 in performance tests.

Note that Celeron N6211 is a desktop processor while Core i3-N305 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron N6211 and Core i3-N305, 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 N6211
Celeron N6211
Intel Core i3-N305
Core i3-N305

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.


2.3 4 votes

Rate Celeron N6211 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 652 votes

Rate Core i3-N305 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron N6211 or Core i3-N305, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.