Celeron N2940 vs Core i5-750
Aggregate performance score
Core i5-750 outperforms Celeron N2940 by a whopping 145% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Core i5-750 and Celeron N2940 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 1990 | 2633 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.16 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | Core i5 (Desktop) | Intel Celeron |
| Architecture codename | Lynnfield (2009−2010) | Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) |
| Release date | 23 September 2009 (14 years ago) | 22 May 2014 (10 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $150 | no data |
| Current price | $163 (1.1x MSRP) | $377 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Core i5-750 and Celeron N2940 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 | 4 (Quad-Core) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 2.66 GHz | 1.83 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.2 GHz | 2.25 GHz |
| Bus support | 2500 MHz | no data |
| L1 cache | 256 KB | 56K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 512K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 8 MB | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 22 nm |
| Die size | 296 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | 73 °C | 100 °C |
| Number of transistors | 774 Million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
Compatibility
Information on Core i5-750 and Celeron N2940 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 | FCLGA1156,LGA1156 | FCBGA1170 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 7.5 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i5-750 and Celeron N2940. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE4.2 | no data |
| AES-NI | - | - |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | 1.0 | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | - |
| Idle States | + | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | - | no data |
| Demand Based Switching | - | no data |
| PAE | 36 Bit | no data |
| Smart Connect | no data | + |
| Status | Discontinued | Discontinued |
Security technologies
Core i5-750 and Celeron N2940 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | + | no data |
| EDB | + | + |
| Secure Key | no data | + |
| Anti-Theft | no data | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i5-750 and Celeron N2940 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | no data | - |
| VT-x | + | + |
| EPT | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i5-750 and Celeron N2940. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR3 |
| Maximum memory size | 16 GB | 8 GB |
| Max memory channels | 2 | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 21 GB/s | 21.32 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | no data | - |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | Intel® HD Graphics for Intel Atom® Processor Z3700 Series |
| Quick Sync Video | no data | + |
| Graphics max frequency | no data | 854 MHz |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Core i5-750 and Celeron N2940 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | no data | 2 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i5-750 and Celeron N2940.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | 2.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 16 | 4 |
| USB revision | no data | 3.0 and 2.0 |
| Total number of SATA ports | no data | 2 |
| Number of USB ports | no data | 5 |
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.
Core i5-750 outperforms Celeron N2940 by 145% based on our aggregate 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%
Core i5-750 outperforms Celeron N2940 by 145% 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%
Core i5-750 outperforms Celeron N2940 by 158% 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%
Core i5-750 outperforms Celeron N2940 by 140% 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%
Core i5-750 outperforms Celeron N2940 by 201% 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%
Core i5-750 outperforms Celeron N2940 by 179% 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%
Core i5-750 outperforms Celeron N2940 by 97% 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 N2940 outperforms Core i5-750 by 142% 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%
Core i5-750 outperforms Celeron N2940 by 135% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.64 | 0.67 |
| Recency | 23 September 2009 | 22 May 2014 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 22 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 7 Watt |
The Core i5-750 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron N2940 in performance tests.
Note that Core i5-750 is a desktop processor while Celeron N2940 is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Core i5-750 and Celeron N2940, 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.
