i3-10100F vs Celeron B710
Aggregate performance score
Core i3-10100F outperforms Celeron B710 by a whopping 7771% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Celeron B710 and Core i3-10100F processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 3389 | 1149 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 19 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 20.22 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | Intel Celeron | no data |
| Power efficiency | 0.19 | 8.02 |
| Architecture codename | Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) | Comet Lake (2020) |
| Release date | 19 June 2011 (13 years ago) | 12 October 2020 (4 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $70 | $122 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Celeron B710 and Core i3-10100F 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 | 8 |
| Base clock speed | 1.6 GHz | 3.6 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.6 GHz | 4.3 GHz |
| Bus type | DMI 2.0 | no data |
| Bus rate | 4 × 5 GT/s | 8 GT/s |
| Multiplier | 16 | no data |
| L1 cache | 64K (per core) | 256 KB |
| L2 cache | 256K (per core) | 1 MB |
| L3 cache | 1.5 MB (shared) | 6 MB |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 131 mm2 | 126 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | 100 °C |
| Number of transistors | 504 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron B710 and Core i3-10100F 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 (Uniprocessor) | 1 |
| Socket | PGA988,PPGA988 | FCLGA1200 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 65 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron B710 and Core i3-10100F. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2 | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2 |
| AES-NI | - | + |
| FMA | + | - |
| AVX | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | 2.0 |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | + |
| Idle States | + | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | + |
| Flex Memory Access | + | no data |
| Demand Based Switching | - | no data |
| Turbo Boost Max 3.0 | no data | - |
| FDI | + | no data |
| Fast Memory Access | + | no data |
Security technologies
Celeron B710 and Core i3-10100F technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | - | - |
| EDB | + | + |
| Secure Key | no data | + |
| 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 Celeron B710 and Core i3-10100F are enumerated here.
| VT-d | - | + |
| VT-x | + | + |
| EPT | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron B710 and Core i3-10100F. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR4 |
| Maximum memory size | 16 GB | 128 GB |
| Max memory channels | 2 | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 21.335 GB/s | 41.6 GB/s |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Intel HD Graphics for 2nd Generation Intel Processors | no data |
| Graphics max frequency | 1 GHz | no data |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Celeron B710 and Core i3-10100F integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | 2 | no data |
| eDP | + | no data |
| DisplayPort | + | - |
| HDMI | + | - |
| SDVO | + | no data |
| CRT | + | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron B710 and Core i3-10100F.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 16 | 16 |
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.07 | 5.51 |
| Recency | 19 June 2011 | 12 October 2020 |
| Physical cores | 1 | 4 |
| Threads | 1 | 8 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 65 Watt |
Celeron B710 has 85.7% lower power consumption.
i3-10100F, on the other hand, has a 7771.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, 300% more physical cores and 700% more threads, and a 128.6% more advanced lithography process.
The Core i3-10100F is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron B710 in performance tests.
Be aware that Celeron B710 is a notebook processor while Core i3-10100F is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron B710 and Core i3-10100F, 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.
