Intel Celeron N3350 vs Intel Celeron N3450

Intel Celeron N3350

► remove from comparison

The Intel Celeron N3350 is a dual-core SoC primarily for inexpensive notebooks and was announced mid 2016. It runs at 1.1 - 2.4 GHz (Single Core Burst, Multi-Core Burst max 2.3 GHz) and is based on the Apollo Lake platform. Similar to the Braswell predecessor, the chip is manufactured in a 14 nm process (P1273) with FinFETs. Besides two CPU cores, the chip also includes a DirectX 12 capable GPU as well as a DDR3L/LPDDR3/LPDDR4 memory controller (dual-channel, up to 1866/2400 MHz).

Architecture

For the first time in a couple of years, Intel completely reworked the CPU architecture of the Atom series. The manufacturer advertises performance gains of roughly 30 percent, but does not reveal any specifics about the individual changes. The new Goldmont architecture should therefore be roughly on par with AMD's Beema/Carrizo-L APUs in terms of per-MHz performance, but it still far behind the more expensive Core CPUs (like Skylake / Kaby Lake).

Performance

The CPU performance of the Celeron N3450 with 2 CPU cores and a clock between 1.1-2.4 GHz should depend a lot on the cooling solution. If the chip can maintain its Boost clock, the N3450 should be about 20-30 percent faster than the old N2840 (Braswell) and compete with an Celeron 2955U (Haswell, 2x 1.4 GHz). This means the processor is only suited for low demanding daily tasks (office, browsing).

GPU Performance

The HD Graphics 500 (Apollo Lake) is based on Intel's Gen9 architecture, which supports DirectX 12 and is also used for the Kaby Lake / Skylake graphics adapters (like HD Graphics 520). Equipped with 12 EUs and a clock of up to 650 MHz, the performance should be roughly on par with the older HD Graphics (Braswell). This means only older and simpler titles will run smoothly.

The chip also includes an advanced video engine with hardware support for the playback of VP9 and H.265 material (8-bit color-depth).

Power Consumption

Similar to the predecessor, Intel specifies the TDP with 6 Watts (SDP 4 Watts – Scenario Design Power). The chip can therefore be cooled passively in theory, but SKUs with fans are possible as well.

Intel Celeron N3450

► remove from comparison

The Intel Celeron N3450 is a quad-core SoC primarily for inexpensive notebooks and was announced mid 2016. It runs at 1.1 - 2.2 GHz (Single Core Burst, Multi-Core Burst max 2.1 GHz) and is based on the Apollo Lake platform. Similar to the Braswell predecessor, the chip is manufactured in a 14 nm process (P1273) with FinFETs. Besides four CPU cores, the chip also includes a DirectX 12 capable GPU as well as a DDR3L/LPDDR3/LPDDR4 memory controller (dual-channel, up to 1866/2400 MHz).

Architecture

For the first time in a couple of years, Intel completely reworked the CPU architecture of the Atom series. The manufacturer advertises performance gains of roughly 30 percent, but does not reveal any specifics about the individual changes. The new Goldmont architecture should therefore be roughly on par with AMD's Beema/Carrizo-L APUs in terms of per-MHz performance, but it still far behind the more expensive Core CPUs (like Skylake / Kaby Lake).

Performance

The CPU performance of the Celeron N3450 with 4 CPU cores and a clock between 1.1-2.2 GHz should depend a lot on the cooling solution. If the chip can maintain its Boost clock, the N3450 should be about 15-20 percent faster than the old N3710 (Braswell) and compete with an AMD A4-7210. This means the processor is perfectly suited for daily tasks (office, browsing) as well as moderate multi-tasking.

GPU Performance

The HD Graphics 500 (Apollo Lake) is based on Intel's Gen9 architecture, which supports DirectX 12 and is also used for the Kaby Lake / Skylake graphics adapters (like HD Graphics 520). Equipped with 12 EUs and a clock of up to 700 MHz, the performance should be roughly on par with the older HD Graphics (Braswell). This means only older and simpler titles like Counter-Strike: GO or Diablo 3 will run smoothly.

The chip also includes an advanced video engine with hardware support for the playback of VP9 and H.265 material (8-bit color-depth).

Power Consumption

Similar to the predecessor, Intel specifies the TDP with 6 Watts (SDP 4 Watts – Scenario Design Power). The chip can therefore be cooled passively in theory, but SKUs with fans are possible as well.

Intel Celeron N3350Intel Celeron N3450
Intel CeleronIntel Celeron
Apollo LakeApollo Lake
Series: Celeron Apollo Lake
Intel Celeron N34501.1 - 2.2 GHz4 / 4
Intel Celeron J3355 compare2 - 2.5 GHz2 / 2
» Intel Celeron N33501.1 - 2.4 GHz2 / 2
» Intel Celeron N34501.1 - 2.2 GHz4 / 4
Intel Celeron J3355 compare2 - 2.5 GHz2 / 2
Intel Celeron N33501.1 - 2.4 GHz2 / 2
1100 - 2400 MHz1100 - 2200 MHz
2 MB2 MB
2 / 24 / 4
6 6
14 14
105 °C105 °C
FCBGA1296FCBGA1296
Intel HD Graphics 500 (12 EUs, 200 - 650 MHz), Quick Sync, AES-NI, max. 8 GB Dual-Channel DDR3L-1866/LPDDR3-1866/LPDDR4-2400 , 8x USB 3.0, 6x PCIe 2.0, 2x SATA 6.0 Gbit/sIntel HD Graphics 500 (12 EUs, 200 - 700 MHz), Quick Sync, AES-NI, max. 8 GB Dual-Channel DDR3L-1866/LPDDR3-1866/LPDDR4-2400 , 8x USB 3.0, 6x PCIe 2.0, 2x SATA 6.0 Gbit/s
iGPUIntel HD Graphics 500 (200 - 650 MHz)Intel HD Graphics 500 (200 - 700 MHz)
Architecturex86x86
$107 U.S.$107 U.S.
Intel Celeron Celeron N3350Intel Celeron Celeron N3450

Benchmarks

Performance Rating - CB R15 + R20 + 7-Zip + X265 + Blender + 3DM11 CPU - Celeron N3350
14.1 pt (14%)
Cinebench R23 - Cinebench R23 CPU (Multi Core)
328 Points (1%)
Cinebench R23 - Cinebench R23 CPU (Single Core)
252 Points (15%)
Cinebench R20 - Cinebench R20 CPU (Single Core)
min: 100     avg: 104     median: 103.5 (16%)     max: 107 Points
Cinebench R20 - Cinebench R20 CPU (Multi Core)
min: 151     avg: 171     median: 170.5 (2%)     max: 190 Points
Cinebench R15 - Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64 Bit
min: 81     avg: 85.4     median: 85 (2%)     max: 92 Points
0102030405060708090100Tooltip
min: 128     avg: 147     median: 143 (3%)     max: 167 Points
0102030405060708090100110120130140150Tooltip
Cinebench R15 - Cinebench R15 CPU Single 64 Bit
min: 43     avg: 45.7     median: 46 (17%)     max: 48 Points
min: 36     avg: 44     median: 44.5 (16%)     max: 48 Points
Cinebench R11.5 - Cinebench R11.5 CPU Multi 64 Bit
min: 1.07     avg: 1.1     median: 1.1 (2%)     max: 1.12 Points
min: 1.63     avg: 1.9     median: 1.9 (4%)     max: 2.1 Points
Cinebench R11.5 - Cinebench R11.5 CPU Single 64 Bit
min: 0.59     avg: 0.6     median: 0.6 (19%)     max: 0.6 Points
min: 0.47     avg: 0.5     median: 0.5 (17%)     max: 0.59 Points
Cinebench R10 - Cinebench R10 Rend. Single (32bit)
min: 1458     avg: 1570     median: 1490 (13%)     max: 1917
min: 1219     avg: 1362     median: 1415 (13%)     max: 1451
Cinebench R10 - Cinebench R10 Rend. Multi (32bit)
min: 1775     avg: 2505     median: 2654 (4%)     max: 2787
min: 3956     avg: 4318     median: 3959 (7%)     max: 5039
wPrime 2.10 - wPrime 2.0 1024m *
min: 1224.8     avg: 1300     median: 1257.7 (15%)     max: 1417.7 s
867 s (10%)
wPrime 2.10 - wPrime 2.0 32m *
min: 42.2     avg: 46.1     median: 45.5 (9%)     max: 50.6 s
min: 21.144     avg: 22.3     median: 22.3 (4%)     max: 23.47 s
WinRAR - WinRAR 4.0
616 (4%)
1020 (7%)
7-Zip 18.03 - 7-Zip 18.03 Multli Thread 4 runs
min: 2692     avg: 2980     median: 2979.5 (2%)     max: 3267 MIPS
7-Zip 18.03 - 7-Zip 18.03 Single Thread 4 runs
min: 1653     avg: 1724     median: 1723.5 (11%)     max: 1794 MIPS
X264 HD Benchmark 4.0 - x264 Pass 2
6.2 fps (3%)
12 fps (5%)
X264 HD Benchmark 4.0 - x264 Pass 1
32.5 fps (10%)
58.2 fps (17%)
HWBOT x265 Benchmark v2.2 - HWBOT x265 4k Preset
min: 0.63     avg: 0.6     median: 0.6 (2%)     max: 0.65 fps
010Tooltip
TrueCrypt - TrueCrypt Serpent
0.1 GB/s (3%)
min: 0.146     avg: 0.1     median: 0.1 (6%)     max: 0.147 GB/s
TrueCrypt - TrueCrypt Twofish
0.1 GB/s (3%)
0.2 GB/s (6%)
TrueCrypt - TrueCrypt AES
0.7 GB/s (2%)
1.2 GB/s (4%)
Blender 2.79 - Blender 2.79 BMW27 CPU *
min: 6274.6     avg: 6276     median: 6275.8 (44%)     max: 6277 Seconds
R Benchmark 2.5 - R Benchmark 2.5 *
min: 2.21     avg: 2.3     median: 2.3 (50%)     max: 2.433 sec
3DMark 06 - CPU - 3DMark 06 - CPU
min: 1624     avg: 1655     median: 1654.5 (9%)     max: 1685 Points
2576 Points (14%)
Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 1M - Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 1M *
min: 27.5     avg: 29.2     median: 27.5 (6%)     max: 32.5 s
min: 27.452     avg: 30.8     median: 30.8 (7%)     max: 34.2 s
Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 2M - Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 2M *
min: 61.2     avg: 64.5     median: 61.2 (3%)     max: 71.1 s
min: 61.176     avg: 67.6     median: 67.6 (3%)     max: 74 s
Super Pi Mod 1.5 XS 32M - Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 32M *
min: 1515     avg: 1532     median: 1538.4 (7%)     max: 1542.7 s
1566 s (7%)
3DMark 11 - 3DM11 Performance Physics
min: 1159     avg: 1294     median: 1333 (5%)     max: 1356 Points
min: 1780     avg: 1980     median: 1925 (8%)     max: 2291 Points
3DMark - 3DMark Ice Storm Physics
min: 11556     avg: 12344     median: 12344 (8%)     max: 13132 Points
14788 Points (10%)
3DMark - 3DMark Ice Storm Extreme Physics
min: 11665     avg: 12042     median: 12041.5 (13%)     max: 12418 Points
14287 Points (15%)
3DMark - 3DMark Ice Storm Unlimited Physics
min: 10653     avg: 12775     median: 13161.5 (14%)     max: 14698 Points
min: 15289     avg: 16256     median: 16256 (17%)     max: 17223 Points
3DMark - 3DMark Cloud Gate Physics
min: 941     avg: 986     median: 978.5 (2%)     max: 1029 Points
min: 1364     avg: 1433     median: 1433 (4%)     max: 1502 Points
3DMark - 3DMark Fire Strike Standard Physics
min: 1293     avg: 1412     median: 1412 (4%)     max: 1501 Points
min: 1952     avg: 2029     median: 2028.5 (5%)     max: 2105 Points
Geekbench 3 - Geekbench 3 32 Bit Multi-Core
min: 2409     avg: 2468     median: 2467.5 (4%)     max: 2526
3958 (7%)
Geekbench 3 - Geekbench 3 32 Bit Single-Core
min: 1314     avg: 1328     median: 1327.5 (27%)     max: 1341
1202 (25%)
Geekbench 4.0 - Geekbench 4.0 64 Bit Single-Core
min: 1464     avg: 1491     median: 1500 (23%)     max: 1510
min: 1385     avg: 1422     median: 1422 (22%)     max: 1459
Geekbench 4.0 - Geekbench 4.0 64 Bit Multi-Core
min: 2529     avg: 2589     median: 2589 (6%)     max: 2648
min: 3821     avg: 3953     median: 3953 (10%)     max: 4085
Geekbench 4.1 - 4.4 - Geekbench 4.1 - 4.4 64 Bit Single-Core
min: 1374     avg: 1473     median: 1495 (20%)     max: 1529
1399 (19%)
Geekbench 4.1 - 4.4 - Geekbench 4.1 - 4.4 64 Bit Multi-Core
min: 2427     avg: 2599     median: 2619.5 (4%)     max: 2731
4001 (6%)
Geekbench 5.0 - Geekbench 5.0 64 Bit Single-Core
309 (18%)
Geekbench 5.0 - Geekbench 5.0 64 Bit Multi-Core
587 (4%)
Geekbench 5.3 - Geekbench 5.1 - 5.3 64 Bit Single-Core
min: 310     avg: 320     median: 320 (18%)     max: 330
Geekbench 5.3 - Geekbench 5.1 - 5.3 64 Bit Multi-Core
min: 591     avg: 606     median: 605.5 (4%)     max: 620
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Kraken 1.1 Total Score *
min: 3108     avg: 3519     median: 3443 (6%)     max: 4230 ms
3476 ms (6%)
Sunspider - Sunspider 1.0 Total Score *
min: 255     avg: 370     median: 299.2 (3%)     max: 627.6 ms
258 ms (3%)
Octane V2 - Octane V2 Total Score
min: 8457     avg: 9831     median: 9492.5 (15%)     max: 11461 Points
11297 Points (18%)
PCMark for Android - PCM f. Android Computer Vision
3574 Points (19%)
PCMark for Android - PCM f. Android Storage
7138 Points (23%)
PCMark for Android - PCM f. Android Work Score 2.0
5377 Points (35%)
PCMark for Android - PCM f. Android Work Score
7007 Points (35%)
Power Consumption - Prime95 Power Consumption - external Monitor *
8.1 Watt (2%)
Power Consumption - Cinebench R15 Multi Power Consumption - external Monitor *
6.7 Watt (2%)

Average Benchmarks Intel Celeron N3350 → 100% n=33

Average Benchmarks Intel Celeron N3450 → 133% n=33

- Range of benchmark values for this graphics card
- Average benchmark values for this graphics card
* Smaller numbers mean a higher performance
1 This benchmark is not used for the average calculation

Add one or more devices and compare

In the following list you can select (and also search for) devices that should be added to the comparison. You can select more than one device.

restrict list:

show all (including archived), 2021, 2020
v1.16
Please share our article, every link counts!
> Notebook / Laptop Reviews and News > Benchmarks / Tech > Processor Comparison - Head 2 Head
Redaktion, 2017-09- 8 (Update: 2017-09-11)