Celeron 3865U vs Core i5-6300U

#ad
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregated performance score

Core i5-6300U
2015
2 cores / 4 threads
2.09
+146%

Core i5-6300U outperforms Celeron 3865U by 146% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core i5-6300U and Celeron 3865U processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking17742443
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel Core i5Intel Celeron
Architecture codenameSkylake (2015−2016)Kaby Lake-U
Release date1 September 2015 (8 years ago)3 January 2017 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$281$107
Current price$552 (2x MSRP)$296 (2.8x MSRP)

Detailed specifications

Core i5-6300U and Celeron 3865U 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)2 (Dual-core)
Threads42
Base clock speed2.4 GHz1.8 GHz
Boost clock speed3 GHz1.8 GHz
L1 cache128 KB64K (per core)
L2 cache512 KB256K (per core)
L3 cache3 MB2 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm14 nm
Die size99 mm298.7 mm2
Maximum core temperature100 °C100 °C
Number of transistors1750 Millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplierNoNo

Compatibility

Information on Core i5-6300U and Celeron 3865U 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
SocketFCBGA1356FCBGA1356,FPBGA1356
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i5-6300U and Celeron 3865U. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2
AES-NI++
AVX++
vPro++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Speed Shiftno data+
My WiFi++
Turbo Boost Technology2.0-
Hyper-Threading Technology++
TSX+-
Idle States++
Thermal Monitoring++
Flex Memory Access++
SIPP+-
Smart Response++
StatusLaunchedDiscontinued

Security technologies

Core i5-6300U and Celeron 3865U technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+-
EDB++
Secure Key++
MPX++
Identity Protection+no data
SGXYes with Intel® MEYes with Intel® ME
OS Guard++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i5-6300U and Celeron 3865U are enumerated here.

AMD-V++
VT-d++
VT-x++
EPT++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i5-6300U and Celeron 3865U. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3, DDR4DDR3, DDR4, DDR3
Maximum memory size32 GB32 GB
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidth34.1 GB/s34.1 GB/s
ECC memory support--

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Intel HD Graphics 520Intel HD Graphics 610
Max video memory32 GB32 GB
Quick Sync Video++
Clear Video++
Clear Video HD++
Graphics max frequency1 GHz900 MHz
InTru 3D+no data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Core i5-6300U and Celeron 3865U integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported33
eDP++
DisplayPort++
HDMI++
DVI++

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by Core i5-6300U and Celeron 3865U integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

4K resolution support++
Max resolution over HDMI 1.44096x2304@24Hz4096x2304@24Hz
Max resolution over eDP4096x2304@60Hz4096x2304@60Hz
Max resolution over DisplayPort4096x2304@60Hz4096x2304@60Hz
Max resolution over VGAN/Ano data

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Core i5-6300U and Celeron 3865U integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectX1212
OpenGL4.54.4

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i5-6300U and Celeron 3865U.

PCIe version3.02.0
PCI Express lanes1210

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.

i5-6300U 2.09
+146%
Celeron 3865U 0.85

Core i5-6300U outperforms Celeron 3865U by 146% 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%

i5-6300U 3231
+146%
Celeron 3865U 1316

Core i5-6300U outperforms Celeron 3865U by 146% 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%

i5-6300U 587
+49.7%
Celeron 3865U 392

Core i5-6300U outperforms Celeron 3865U by 50% 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%

i5-6300U 1313
+90%
Celeron 3865U 691

Core i5-6300U outperforms Celeron 3865U by 90% 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%

i5-6300U 4679
+64%
Celeron 3865U 2853

Core i5-6300U outperforms Celeron 3865U by 64% 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%

i5-6300U 10573
+94.9%
Celeron 3865U 5425

Core i5-6300U outperforms Celeron 3865U by 95% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.

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%

i5-6300U 16.18
+143%
Celeron 3865U 39.36

Celeron 3865U outperforms Core i5-6300U by 143% 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%

i5-6300U 3
+105%
Celeron 3865U 2

Core i5-6300U outperforms Celeron 3865U by 105% 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%

i5-6300U 307
+116%
Celeron 3865U 142

Core i5-6300U outperforms Celeron 3865U by 116% 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%

i5-6300U 122
+69.4%
Celeron 3865U 72

Core i5-6300U outperforms Celeron 3865U by 69% 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%

i5-6300U 1.4
+62.8%
Celeron 3865U 0.86

Core i5-6300U outperforms Celeron 3865U by 63% 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%

i5-6300U 1.7
+110%
Celeron 3865U 0.8

Core i5-6300U outperforms Celeron 3865U by 110% in TrueCrypt AES.

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%

i5-6300U 108
+97.6%
Celeron 3865U 54

Core i5-6300U outperforms Celeron 3865U by 98% 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%

i5-6300U 20
+86.9%
Celeron 3865U 11

Core i5-6300U outperforms Celeron 3865U by 87% in x264 encoding pass 2.

Geekbench 3 32-bit single-core

Benchmark coverage: 5%

i5-6300U 2864
+55.4%
Celeron 3865U 1843

Core i5-6300U outperforms Celeron 3865U by 55% in Geekbench 3 32-bit single-core.

Geekbench 3 32-bit multi-core

Benchmark coverage: 5%

i5-6300U 6184
+91.8%
Celeron 3865U 3224

Core i5-6300U outperforms Celeron 3865U by 92% in Geekbench 3 32-bit multi-core.

Geekbench 4.0 64-bit multi-core

Benchmark coverage: 2%

i5-6300U 6685
+87.6%
Celeron 3865U 3564

Core i5-6300U outperforms Celeron 3865U by 88% in Geekbench 4.0 64-bit multi-core.

Geekbench 4.0 64-bit single-core

Benchmark coverage: 2%

i5-6300U 3540
+62.2%
Celeron 3865U 2182

Core i5-6300U outperforms Celeron 3865U by 62% in Geekbench 4.0 64-bit single-core.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.09 0.85
Integrated graphics card 2.15 1.84
Recency 1 September 2015 3 January 2017
Threads 4 2
Cost $281 $107

The Core i5-6300U is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron 3865U in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core i5-6300U and Celeron 3865U, 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 i5-6300U
Core i5-6300U
Intel Celeron 3865U
Celeron 3865U

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.


3.7 630 votes

Rate Core i5-6300U on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 96 votes

Rate Celeron 3865U on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core i5-6300U or Celeron 3865U, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.