Celeron N6211 vs Core i7-3740QM

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon

Aggregate performance score

Core i7-3740QM
2012
4 cores / 8 threads, 45 Watt
3.68
+154%

i7-3740QM outperforms Celeron N6211 by a whopping 154% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core i7-3740QM and Celeron N6211 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking14212092
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data3.51
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesIntel Core i7Elkhart Lake
Architecture codenameIvy Bridge (2012−2013)Elkhart Lake
Release date3 September 2012 (11 years ago)17 July 2022 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$378$54
Current price$477 (1.3x MSRP)$240 (4.4x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Core i7-3740QM and Celeron N6211 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads82
Base clock speed2.7 GHz1.2 GHz
Boost clock speed3.7 GHz3 GHz
L1 cache64K (per core)no data
L2 cache256K (per core)1.5 MB
L3 cache6 MB (shared)no data
Chip lithography22 nm10 nm
Die size160 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature105 °Cno data
Number of transistors1,400 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplierNoNo

Compatibility

Information on Core i7-3740QM and Celeron N6211 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 configuration1no data
SocketFCBGA1224,FCPGA988BGA1493
Power consumption (TDP)45 Watt6.5 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i7-3740QM and Celeron N6211. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® AVXno data
AES-NI++
AVX+no data
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
My WiFi+no data
Turbo Boost Technology2.0no data
Hyper-Threading Technology+no data
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+no data
Flex Memory Access+no data
Demand Based Switching-no data
FDI+no data
Fast Memory Access+no data
StatusDiscontinuedno data

Security technologies

Core i7-3740QM and Celeron N6211 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+no data
EDB+no data
Secure Key+no data
Identity Protection+no data
Anti-Theft+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i7-3740QM and Celeron N6211 are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i7-3740QM and Celeron N6211. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR4
Maximum memory size32 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidth25.6 GB/sno data
ECC memory support-no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Intel HD Graphics 4000Intel UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 16 EU)
Quick Sync Video+no data
Clear Video HD+no data
Graphics max frequency1.3 GHzno data
InTru 3D+no data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Core i7-3740QM and Celeron N6211 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported3no data
eDP+no data
DisplayPort+no data
HDMI+no data
SDVO+no data
CRT+no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i7-3740QM and Celeron N6211.

PCIe version3.0no data
PCI Express lanes16no 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.

i7-3740QM 3.68
+154%
Celeron N6211 1.45

Core i7-3740QM outperforms Celeron N6211 by 154% 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%

i7-3740QM 5695
+154%
Celeron N6211 2245

Core i7-3740QM outperforms Celeron N6211 by 154% in Passmark.

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%

i7-3740QM 4951
+83.6%
Celeron N6211 2696

Core i7-3740QM outperforms Celeron N6211 by 84% 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%

i7-3740QM 19798
+322%
Celeron N6211 4693

Core i7-3740QM outperforms Celeron N6211 by 322% 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%

i7-3740QM 7.58
+555%
Celeron N6211 49.66

Celeron N6211 outperforms Core i7-3740QM by 555% 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%

i7-3740QM 7
+322%
Celeron N6211 2

Core i7-3740QM outperforms Celeron N6211 by 322% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-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%

i7-3740QM 1.53
+57.7%
Celeron N6211 0.97

Core i7-3740QM outperforms Celeron N6211 by 58% 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%

i7-3740QM 3.5
+257%
Celeron N6211 1

Core i7-3740QM outperforms Celeron N6211 by 257% in TrueCrypt AES.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

i7-3740QM 4680
+540%
Celeron N6211 731

Core i7-3740QM outperforms Celeron N6211 by 540% in WinRAR 4.0.

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%

i7-3740QM 39
+286%
Celeron N6211 10

Core i7-3740QM outperforms Celeron N6211 by 286% in x264 encoding pass 2.

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%

i7-3740QM 154
+240%
Celeron N6211 45

Core i7-3740QM outperforms Celeron N6211 by 240% in x264 encoding pass 1.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.68 1.45
Integrated graphics card 1.18 1.33
Recency 3 September 2012 17 July 2022
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 8 2
Cost $378 $54
Chip lithography 22 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 45 Watt 6 Watt

The Core i7-3740QM is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron N6211 in performance tests.

Be aware that Core i7-3740QM is a notebook processor while Celeron N6211 is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core i7-3740QM and Celeron N6211, 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 i7-3740QM
Core i7-3740QM
Intel Celeron N6211
Celeron N6211

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.


1.5 1921 vote

Rate Core i7-3740QM on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.3 4 votes

Rate Celeron N6211 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core i7-3740QM or Celeron N6211, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.