Celeron N3060 vs Core i7-870

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

Comparing Core i7-870 and Celeron N3060 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking1833not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.95no data
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
Seriesno dataIntel Celeron
Architecture codenameLynnfield (2009−2010)Braswell (2015−2016)
Release dateSeptember 2009 (14 years ago)1 April 2015 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$305$107
Current price$88 (0.3x MSRP)$243 (2.3x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Core i7-870 and Celeron N3060 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 speed2.93 GHz1.6 GHz
Boost clock speed3.6 GHz2.48 GHz
L1 cache64 KB (per core)no data
L2 cache256 KB (per core)2 MB
L3 cache8 MB (shared)0 KB
Chip lithography45 nm14 nm
Die size296 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature73 °C90 °C
Number of transistors774 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplierNoNo

Compatibility

Information on Core i7-870 and Celeron N3060 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
SocketFCLGA1156,LGA1156FCBGA1170
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt6 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i7-870 and Celeron N3060. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.2no data
AES-NI-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Turbo Boost Technology1.0-
Hyper-Threading Technology+-
Idle States++
Thermal Monitoring-+
SIPPno data-
Smart Responseno data-
Demand Based Switching-no data
PAE36 Bitno data
GPIOno data+
Smart Connectno data-
StatusDiscontinuedLaunched
HD Audiono data+
RSTno data-

Security technologies

Core i7-870 and Celeron N3060 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+-
EDB++
Secure Bootno data+
Secure Keyno data+
Identity Protectionno data+
OS Guardno data-
Anti-Theftno data-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i7-870 and Celeron N3060 are enumerated here.

VT-d+-
VT-x++
VT-ino data-
EPT++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i7-870 and Celeron N3060. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3
Maximum memory size16 GB8 GB
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidth21 GB/sno data
ECC memory support--

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataIntel HD Graphics 400 (Braswell)
Max video memoryno data8 GB
Quick Sync Videono data+
Clear Videono data+
Clear Video HDno data+
Graphics max frequencyno data600 MHz
Execution Unitsno data12

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Core i7-870 and Celeron N3060 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data3
eDPno data+
DisplayPortno data+
HDMIno data+

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Core i7-870 and Celeron N3060 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno data+
OpenGLno data+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i7-870 and Celeron N3060.

PCIe version2.02.0
PCI Express lanes164
USB revisionno data2.0/3.0
Total number of SATA portsno data2
Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Portsno data2
Number of USB portsno data5
Integrated LANno data-
UARTno 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.


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%

i7-870 3128
+373%
Celeron N3060 661

Core i7-870 outperforms Celeron N3060 by 373% 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%

i7-870 4007
+216%
Celeron N3060 1267

Core i7-870 outperforms Celeron N3060 by 216% in Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core.

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%

i7-870 5
+539%
Celeron N3060 1

Core i7-870 outperforms Celeron N3060 by 539% 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%

i7-870 497
+586%
Celeron N3060 73

Core i7-870 outperforms Celeron N3060 by 586% 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: 14%

i7-870 100
+163%
Celeron N3060 38

Core i7-870 outperforms Celeron N3060 by 163% 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%

i7-870 1.19
+170%
Celeron N3060 0.44

Core i7-870 outperforms Celeron N3060 by 170% 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%

i7-870 0.5
+13.3%
Celeron N3060 0.5

Core i7-870 outperforms Celeron N3060 by 13% in TrueCrypt AES.

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%

i7-870 29
+432%
Celeron N3060 5

Core i7-870 outperforms Celeron N3060 by 432% 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%

i7-870 121
+326%
Celeron N3060 28

Core i7-870 outperforms Celeron N3060 by 326% in x264 encoding pass 1.

Pros & cons summary


Physical cores 4 2
Threads 8 2
Cost $305 $107
Chip lithography 45 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 6 Watt

We couldn't decide between Core i7-870 and Celeron N3060. We've got no test results to judge.

Note that Core i7-870 is a desktop processor while Celeron N3060 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core i7-870 and Celeron N3060, 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 i7-870
Core i7-870
Intel Celeron N3060
Celeron N3060

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.


3.9 1052 votes

Rate Core i7-870 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.5 712 votes

Rate Celeron N3060 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core i7-870 or Celeron N3060, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.