Celeron 1017U vs Pentium N3700

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Pentium N3700
2015
4 cores / 4 threads, 6 Watt
0.80
Celeron 1017U
2013
2 cores / 2 threads, 17 Watt
0.97
+21.3%

Celeron 1017U outperforms Pentium N3700 by a significant 21% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Pentium N3700 and Celeron 1017U processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking25092393
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel PentiumIntel Celeron
Architecture codenameBraswell (2015−2016)Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)
Release date1 April 2015 (9 years ago)1 July 2013 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$161no data
Current price$358 (2.2x MSRP)$299

Detailed specifications

Pentium N3700 and Celeron 1017U 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)
Threads42
Base clock speed1.6 GHz1.6 GHz
Boost clock speed2.4 GHz1.6 GHz
L1 cacheno data128 KB
L2 cache2 MB512 KB
L3 cache0 KB2 MB
Chip lithography14 nm22 nm
Die sizeno data94 mm2
Maximum core temperature90 °C105 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplierNoNo

Compatibility

Information on Pentium N3700 and Celeron 1017U 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
SocketFCBGA1170FCBGA1023
Power consumption (TDP)6 Watt17 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Pentium N3700 and Celeron 1017U. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2
AES-NI+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
My WiFino data-
Turbo Boost Technology--
Hyper-Threading Technology--
Idle States++
Thermal Monitoring++
Flex Memory Accessno data+
SIPP-no data
Smart Response-no data
Demand Based Switchingno data-
GPIO+no data
Smart Connect-no data
FDIno data+
Fast Memory Accessno data+
StatusDiscontinuedDiscontinued
HD Audio+no data
RST-no data

Security technologies

Pentium N3700 and Celeron 1017U technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

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

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Pentium N3700 and Celeron 1017U are enumerated here.

VT-d--
VT-x++
VT-i-no data
EPT++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Pentium N3700 and Celeron 1017U. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3
Maximum memory size8 GB32 GB
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidthno data25.6 GB/s
ECC memory support--

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel® HD Graphics for Intel® Celeron® Processor N3000 SeriesIntel® HD Graphics for 3rd Generation Intel® Processors
Max video memory8 GBno data
Quick Sync Video+-
Clear Video+-
Clear Video HD+-
Graphics max frequency700 MHz1 GHz
Execution Units16no data
InTru 3D--

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Pentium N3700 and Celeron 1017U integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported33
eDP++
DisplayPort++
HDMI++
SDVOno data+
CRTno data+

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Pentium N3700 and Celeron 1017U integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectX+no data
OpenGL+no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Pentium N3700 and Celeron 1017U.

PCIe version2.02.0
PCI Express lanes416
USB revision2.0/3.0no data
Total number of SATA ports2no data
Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Ports2no data
Number of USB ports5no data
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.


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.

Pentium N3700 0.80
Celeron 1017U 0.97
+21.3%

Celeron 1017U outperforms Pentium N3700 by 21% 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%

Pentium N3700 1245
Celeron 1017U 1508
+21.1%

Celeron 1017U outperforms Pentium N3700 by 21% 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%

Pentium N3700 179
Celeron 1017U 271
+51.4%

Celeron 1017U outperforms Pentium N3700 by 51% 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%

Pentium N3700 517
+11.4%
Celeron 1017U 464

Pentium N3700 outperforms Celeron 1017U by 11% 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%

Pentium N3700 1200
Celeron 1017U 2201
+83.4%

Celeron 1017U outperforms Pentium N3700 by 83% 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%

Pentium N3700 3148
Celeron 1017U 4155
+32%

Celeron 1017U outperforms Pentium N3700 by 32% 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%

Pentium N3700 2175
+26.5%
Celeron 1017U 1719

Pentium N3700 outperforms Celeron 1017U by 26% 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%

Pentium N3700 23.09
+101%
Celeron 1017U 46.38

Celeron 1017U outperforms Pentium N3700 by 101% 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%

Pentium N3700 2
+31.5%
Celeron 1017U 1

Pentium N3700 outperforms Celeron 1017U by 32% 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%

Pentium N3700 0.45
Celeron 1017U 0.61
+35.6%

Celeron 1017U outperforms Pentium N3700 by 36% 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%

Pentium N3700 0.9
+571%
Celeron 1017U 0.1

Pentium N3700 outperforms Celeron 1017U by 571% 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%

Pentium N3700 1030
Celeron 1017U 1150
+11.7%

Celeron 1017U outperforms Pentium N3700 by 12% 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%

Pentium N3700 10
+32.6%
Celeron 1017U 8

Pentium N3700 outperforms Celeron 1017U by 33% 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%

Pentium N3700 50
+18.7%
Celeron 1017U 42

Pentium N3700 outperforms Celeron 1017U by 19% in x264 encoding pass 1.

Geekbench 3 32-bit multi-core

Benchmark coverage: 5%

Pentium N3700 3211
+39.1%
Celeron 1017U 2308

Pentium N3700 outperforms Celeron 1017U by 39% in Geekbench 3 32-bit multi-core.

Geekbench 3 32-bit single-core

Benchmark coverage: 5%

Pentium N3700 956
Celeron 1017U 1367
+43%

Celeron 1017U outperforms Pentium N3700 by 43% in Geekbench 3 32-bit single-core.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.80 0.97
Recency 1 April 2015 1 July 2013
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Chip lithography 14 nm 22 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 6 Watt 17 Watt

The Celeron 1017U is our recommended choice as it beats the Pentium N3700 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Pentium N3700 and Celeron 1017U, 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 Pentium N3700
Pentium N3700
Intel Celeron 1017U
Celeron 1017U

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.


2.7 318 votes

Rate Pentium N3700 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 66 votes

Rate Celeron 1017U on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Pentium N3700 or Celeron 1017U, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.