Celeron N4000 vs Apple M3 Max 16-Core
Aggregate performance score
Apple M3 Max 16-Core outperforms Celeron N4000 by a whopping 2682% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing M3 Max 16-Core and Celeron N4000 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 193 | 2529 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | Apple M3 | Intel Celeron |
| Power efficiency | 31.39 | 14.67 |
| Architecture codename | no data | Goldmont Plus (2017) |
| Release date | 30 October 2023 (1 year ago) | 11 December 2017 (7 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $107 |
Detailed specifications
M3 Max 16-Core and Celeron N4000 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 | 16 (Hexadeca-Core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 16 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | 2.748 GHz | 1.1 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4.06 GHz | 2.6 GHz |
| Multiplier | no data | 11 |
| L1 cache | no data | 112 KB |
| L2 cache | no data | 4 MB |
| L3 cache | no data | 4 MB |
| Chip lithography | 3 nm | 14 nm |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 105 deg C |
| Number of transistors | 92000 Million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | no data | + |
Compatibility
Information on M3 Max 16-Core and Celeron N4000 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 | no data | 1 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | no data | FCBGA1090 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 78 Watt | 6 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by M3 Max 16-Core and Celeron N4000. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | Intel® SSE4.2 |
| AES-NI | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Speed Shift | no data | - |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | - |
| Idle States | no data | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | - | + |
| Smart Response | no data | - |
| GPIO | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Max 3.0 | no data | - |
Security technologies
M3 Max 16-Core and Celeron N4000 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| EDB | no data | + |
| Secure Key | no data | + |
| MPX | - | + |
| Identity Protection | - | + |
| SGX | no data | Yes with Intel® ME |
| OS Guard | no data | + |
| Anti-Theft | no data | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by M3 Max 16-Core and Celeron N4000 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
| EPT | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by M3 Max 16-Core and Celeron N4000. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR4 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 8 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 38.397 GB/s |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | Apple M3 Max 40-Core GPU | Intel UHD Graphics 600 |
| Max video memory | no data | 8 GB |
| Quick Sync Video | - | + |
| Graphics max frequency | no data | 650 MHz |
| Execution Units | no data | 12 |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of M3 Max 16-Core and Celeron N4000 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | no data | 3 |
| eDP | no data | + |
| DisplayPort | - | + |
| HDMI | - | + |
| MIPI-DSI | no data | + |
Graphics image quality
Maximum display resolutions supported by M3 Max 16-Core and Celeron N4000 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.
| 4K resolution support | no data | + |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by M3 Max 16-Core and Celeron N4000 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | no data | 12 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.4 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by M3 Max 16-Core and Celeron N4000.
| 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.
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.
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.
Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core
Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 25.87 | 0.93 |
| Recency | 30 October 2023 | 11 December 2017 |
| Physical cores | 16 | 2 |
| Threads | 16 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 3 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 78 Watt | 6 Watt |
Apple M3 Max 16-Core has a 2681.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, 700% more physical cores and 700% more threads, and a 366.7% more advanced lithography process.
Celeron N4000, on the other hand, has 1200% lower power consumption.
The M3 Max 16-Core is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron N4000 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between Apple M3 Max 16-Core and Celeron N4000, 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.
