Celeron N5095 vs Core i7-9750H

#ad
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregated performance score

Core i7-9750H
2019
6 cores / 12 threads
7.04
+166%
Celeron N5095
2021
4 cores / 4 threads
2.65

Core i7-9750H outperforms Celeron N5095 by 166% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Primary Details

Comparing Core i7-9750H and Celeron N5095 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking9151607
Place by popularity9557
Cost-Effectiveness Evaluationno data0.92
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesIntel Core i7Intel Jasper Lake
Architecture codenameCoffee Lake-HR (2019)Jasper Lake (2021)
Release date23 April 2019 (5 years ago)11 January 2021 (3 years ago)
Current price$840 $1654

Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed Specifications

Core i7-9750H and Celeron N5095 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 cores6 (Hexa-Core)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads124
Base clock speed2.6 GHz2 GHz
Boost clock speed4.5 GHz2.9 GHz
L1 cache64K (per core)no data
L2 cache256K (per core)1.5 MB
L3 cache12 MB (shared)4 MB
Chip lithography14 nm10 nm
Die size149 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature100 °C105 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)72 °Cno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility+-
Unlocked multiplierNoNo

Compatibility

Information on Core i7-9750H and Celeron N5095 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
SocketFCBGA1440FCBGA1338
Power consumption (TDP)45 Watt15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i7-9750H and Celeron N5095. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2Intel® SSE4.2
AES-NI++
FMA+no data
AVX+no data
vProno data-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Speed Shift++
My WiFi+no data
Turbo Boost Technology2.0-
Hyper-Threading Technology+-
TSX-no data
Idle States++
Thermal Monitoring++
Flex Memory Access+no data
SIPP-no data
Smart Responseno data-
GPIOno data+
Turbo Boost Max 3.0no data-
StatusDiscontinuedLaunched

Security technologies

Core i7-9750H and Celeron N5095 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

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

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i7-9750H and Celeron N5095 are enumerated here.

VT-d++
VT-x++
EPT++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i7-9750H and Celeron N5095. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3, DDR4DDR4, DDR4
Maximum memory size128 GB16 GB
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidth41.8 GB/sno data
ECC memory support--

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Intel UHD Graphics 630Intel UHD Graphics
Max video memory64 GBno data
Quick Sync Video++
Clear Video+no data
Clear Video HD+no data
Graphics max frequency1.15 GHz750 MHz
Execution Unitsno data16
InTru 3D+no data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Core i7-9750H and Celeron N5095 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported33
eDP++
DisplayPort++
HDMI++
DVI+no data
MIPI-DSIno data+

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by Core i7-9750H and Celeron N5095 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

4K resolution support++
Max resolution over HDMI 1.44096 x 2304@30Hz4096x2160@60Hz
Max resolution over eDP4096 x 2304@60Hz4096x2160@60Hz
Max resolution over DisplayPort4096 x 2304@60Hz4096x2160@60Hz
Max resolution over VGAN/Ano data

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Core i7-9750H and Celeron N5095 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectX1212
OpenGL4.54.5

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i7-9750H and Celeron N5095.

PCIe version3.0no data
PCI Express lanes168
USB revisionno data2.0/3.2
Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Portsno data2
Number of USB portsno data14
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.


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.

i7-9750H 7.04
+166%
Celeron N5095 2.65

Core i7-9750H outperforms Celeron N5095 by 166% 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%

i7-9750H 10881
+166%
Celeron N5095 4098

Core i7-9750H outperforms Celeron N5095 by 166% 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%

i7-9750H 6970
+96.6%
Celeron N5095 3545

Core i7-9750H outperforms Celeron N5095 by 97% 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%

i7-9750H 34445
+180%
Celeron N5095 12283

Core i7-9750H outperforms Celeron N5095 by 180% 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%

i7-9750H 10792
+105%
Celeron N5095 5272

Core i7-9750H outperforms Celeron N5095 by 105% 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%

i7-9750H 4.93
+295%
Celeron N5095 19.49

Celeron N5095 outperforms Core i7-9750H by 295% 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%

i7-9750H 13
+178%
Celeron N5095 5

Core i7-9750H outperforms Celeron N5095 by 178% 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%

i7-9750H 1188
+226%
Celeron N5095 364

Core i7-9750H outperforms Celeron N5095 by 226% 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%

i7-9750H 186
+75%
Celeron N5095 106

Core i7-9750H outperforms Celeron N5095 by 75% 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%

i7-9750H 2.12
+66.9%
Celeron N5095 1.27

Core i7-9750H outperforms Celeron N5095 by 67% 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%

i7-9750H 7.4
+194%
Celeron N5095 2.5

Core i7-9750H outperforms Celeron N5095 by 194% 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%

i7-9750H 6396
+275%
Celeron N5095 1706

Core i7-9750H outperforms Celeron N5095 by 275% in WinRAR 4.0.

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%

i7-9750H 215
+84.4%
Celeron N5095 117

Core i7-9750H outperforms Celeron N5095 by 84% 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%

i7-9750H 70
+181%
Celeron N5095 25

Core i7-9750H outperforms Celeron N5095 by 181% in x264 encoding pass 2.

Gaming performance

Pros & Cons Summary


Performance score 7.04 2.65
Integrated graphics card 3.08
Recency 23 April 2019 11 January 2021
Physical cores 6 4
Threads 12 4
Chip lithography 14 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 45 Watt 15 Watt

The Core i7-9750H is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron N5095 in performance tests.

Be aware that Core i7-9750H is a notebook processor while Celeron N5095 is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core i7-9750H and Celeron N5095, 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 i7-9750H
Core i7-9750H
Intel Celeron N5095
Celeron N5095

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.


4.2 1652 votes

Rate Core i7-9750H on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 1179 votes

Rate Celeron N5095 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & Сomments

Here you can ask a question about Core i7-9750H or Celeron N5095, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.