Celeron 600 vs i3-1115G4
Aggregate performance score
Core i3-1115G4 outperforms Celeron 600 by a whopping 4133% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Core i3-1115G4 and Celeron 600 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 1466 | 3374 |
| Place by popularity | 55 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | Intel Tiger Lake | no data |
| Power efficiency | 12.88 | 0.28 |
| Architecture codename | Tiger Lake-UP3 (2020−2021) | Timna |
| Release date | 2 September 2020 (4 years ago) | no data (2024 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Core i3-1115G4 and Celeron 600 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 cores | 2 (Dual-core) | 1 (Single-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 1 |
| Base clock speed | 3 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 4.1 GHz | 0.6 GHz |
| Bus rate | 4 GT/s | no data |
| L1 cache | 96K (per core) | 32 KB |
| L2 cache | 1.25 MB (per core) | 128 KB |
| L3 cache | 6 MB (shared) | no data |
| Chip lithography | 10 nm SuperFin | 180 nm |
| Die size | no data | 129 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | no data |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 72 °C | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | - |
| Windows 11 compatibility | + | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Core i3-1115G4 and Celeron 600 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 configuration | 1 | 1 |
| Socket | FCBGA1449 | 370S |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 28 Watt | 30 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i3-1115G4 and Celeron 600. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512 | no data |
| AES-NI | + | - |
| FMA | + | - |
| AVX | + | - |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| Speed Shift | + | no data |
| Turbo Boost Technology | 2.0 | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | + | no data |
| TSX | + | - |
| Idle States | + | no data |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | - |
| Deep Learning Boost | + | - |
Security technologies
Core i3-1115G4 and Celeron 600 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | + | no data |
| SGX | - | no data |
| OS Guard | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i3-1115G4 and Celeron 600 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | + | no data |
| VT-x | + | no data |
| EPT | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i3-1115G4 and Celeron 600. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 | no data |
| Maximum memory size | 64 GB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 2 | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | Intel UHD Graphics for 11th Gen Intel Processors | Intel i752 |
| Quick Sync Video | + | - |
| Clear Video HD | + | no data |
| Graphics max frequency | 1.25 GHz | no data |
| Execution Units | 48 | no data |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Core i3-1115G4 and Celeron 600 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | 4 | no data |
Graphics image quality
Maximum display resolutions supported by Core i3-1115G4 and Celeron 600 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.
| Max resolution over HDMI 1.4 | 4096x2304@60Hz | no data |
| Max resolution over eDP | 4096x2304@60Hz | no data |
| Max resolution over DisplayPort | 7680x4320@60Hz | no data |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by Core i3-1115G4 and Celeron 600 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | 12.1 | no data |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i3-1115G4 and Celeron 600.
| PCIe version | 4.0 | no data |
| PCI Express lanes | 16 | 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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 3.81 | 0.09 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 1 |
| Threads | 4 | 1 |
| Chip lithography | 10 nm | 180 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 28 Watt | 30 Watt |
i3-1115G4 has a 4133.3% higher aggregate performance score, 100% more physical cores and 300% more threads, a 1700% more advanced lithography process, and 7.1% lower power consumption.
The Core i3-1115G4 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron 600 in performance tests.
Be aware that Core i3-1115G4 is a notebook processor while Celeron 600 is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Core i3-1115G4 and Celeron 600, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
