Celeron N3450 vs Pentium M 740
Primary details
Comparing Pentium M 740 and Celeron N3450 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | not rated | 2196 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | Pentium M | Intel Celeron |
| Architecture codename | Dothan (2004−2005) | Apollo Lake (2016) |
| Release date | January 2005 (19 years ago) | 1 September 2016 (7 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $107 |
| Current price | $62 | $242 (2.3x MSRP) |
Detailed specifications
Pentium M 740 and Celeron N3450 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 | 1 (Single-Core) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 1 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 1.73 GHz | 1.1 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.73 GHz | 2.2 GHz |
| Bus support | 533 MHz | no data |
| L1 cache | 32 KB | no data |
| L2 cache | 2 MB | 2 MB |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 90 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 84 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | 105 °C |
| Number of transistors | 140 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | - | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
| VID voltage range | 1.26V-1.356V | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Pentium M 740 and Celeron N3450 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 | PPGA478, H-PBGA479 | FCBGA1296 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 27 Watt | 6 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Pentium M 740 and Celeron N3450. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | no data | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | - |
| Idle States | - | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | no data | + |
| SIPP | no data | - |
| Smart Response | no data | - |
| Demand Based Switching | - | no data |
| PAE | 32 Bit | no data |
| GPIO | no data | + |
| Smart Connect | no data | - |
| FSB parity | - | no data |
| Status | Discontinued | Discontinued |
| HD Audio | no data | + |
| RST | no data | - |
Security technologies
Pentium M 740 and Celeron N3450 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | - | + |
| EDB | + | + |
| Secure Boot | no data | + |
| Secure Key | no data | + |
| MPX | no data | + |
| Identity Protection | no data | + |
| OS Guard | no data | + |
| Anti-Theft | no data | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Pentium M 740 and Celeron N3450 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | - | + |
| VT-i | no data | - |
| EPT | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Pentium M 740 and Celeron N3450. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR3, DDR4 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 8 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| ECC memory support | - | - |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | Intel HD Graphics 500 |
| Max video memory | no data | 8 GB |
| Quick Sync Video | no data | + |
| Clear Video | no data | + |
| Clear Video HD | no data | + |
| Graphics max frequency | no data | 700 MHz |
| Execution Units | no data | 12 |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Pentium M 740 and Celeron N3450 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | no data | 3 |
| eDP | no data | + |
| DisplayPort | no data | + |
| HDMI | no data | + |
| MIPI-DSI | no data | + |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by Pentium M 740 and Celeron N3450 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | no data | + |
| OpenGL | no data | + |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Pentium M 740 and Celeron N3450.
| PCIe version | no data | 2.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 6 |
| USB revision | no data | 2.0/3.0 |
| Total number of SATA ports | no data | 2 |
| Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Ports | no data | 2 |
| Number of USB ports | no data | 8 |
| Integrated LAN | no data | - |
| UART | no 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.
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%
Pentium M 740 outperforms Celeron N3450 by 1% in Cinebench 10 32-bit single-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%
Celeron N3450 outperforms Pentium M 740 by 250% in 3DMark06 CPU.
Pros & cons summary
| Physical cores | 1 | 4 |
| Threads | 1 | 4 |
| Chip lithography | 90 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 27 Watt | 6 Watt |
We couldn't decide between Pentium M 740 and Celeron N3450. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Pentium M 740 and Celeron N3450, 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.
