Celeron N2920 vs i3-330E

Aggregate performance score

Core i3-330E
2010
2 cores / 4 threads, 35 Watt
0.82
+32.3%

Core i3-330E outperforms Celeron N2920 by a substantial 32% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core i3-330E and Celeron N2920 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking26022787
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel Core i3Intel Celeron
Power efficiency2.148.08
Architecture codenameWestmere (2010−2011)Bay Trail-M (2013−2014)
Release date7 January 2010 (14 years ago)1 December 2013 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$177$107

Detailed specifications

Core i3-330E and Celeron N2920 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)
Threads44
Base clock speed2.13 GHz1.86 GHz
Boost clock speed0.03 GHz2 GHz
Bus typeDMI 1.0no data
Bus rate1 × 2.5 GT/sno data
Multiplier16no data
L1 cache128 KB56K (per core)
L2 cache512 KB512K (per core)
L3 cache3 MB0 KB
Chip lithography32 nm22 nm
Die size81 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature90 °C for rPGA,105 °C for BGA105 °C
Number of transistors382 Millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Core i3-330E and Celeron N2920 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
SocketBGA1288FCBGA1170
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt7.5 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i3-330E and Celeron N2920. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2no data
FMA+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Turbo Boost Technology--
Hyper-Threading Technology+-
Idle States++
Thermal Monitoring+-
Flex Memory Access+no data
PAE36 Bitno data
Smart Connectno data+
FDI+no data
Fast Memory Access+no data
RSTno data-

Security technologies

Core i3-330E and Celeron N2920 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-no data
EDB++
Anti-Theftno data-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i3-330E and Celeron N2920 are enumerated here.

VT-d--
VT-x++
EPT+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i3-330E and Celeron N2920. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3-800, DDR3-1066DDR3
Maximum memory size8.79 GB8 GB
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidth17.051 GB/sno data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel® HD Graphics for Previous Generation Intel® ProcessorsIntel® HD Graphics for Intel Atom® Processor Z3700 Series
Clear Video+no data
Clear Video HD+-
Graphics max frequency667 MHz844 MHz

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Core i3-330E and Celeron N2920 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported22

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i3-330E and Celeron N2920.

PCIe version2.02.0
PCI Express lanes164
USB revisionno data3.0 and 2.0
Total number of SATA portsno data2
Number of USB portsno data5

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.

i3-330E 0.82
+32.3%
Celeron N2920 0.62

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.

i3-330E 1260
+32.6%
Celeron N2920 950

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.82 0.62
Recency 7 January 2010 1 December 2013
Physical cores 2 4
Chip lithography 32 nm 22 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 7 Watt

i3-330E has a 32.3% higher aggregate performance score.

Celeron N2920, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, 100% more physical cores, a 45.5% more advanced lithography process, and 400% lower power consumption.

The Core i3-330E is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron N2920 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core i3-330E and Celeron N2920, 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 Core i3-330E
Core i3-330E
Intel Celeron N2920
Celeron N2920

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.


4 1 vote

Rate Core i3-330E on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.5 32 votes

Rate Celeron N2920 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core i3-330E or Celeron N2920, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.