Celeron N3150 vs G1610

Aggregate performance score

Celeron G1610
2012
2 cores / 2 threads, 55 Watt
0.96
+28%
Celeron N3150
2015
4 cores / 4 threads, 6 Watt
0.75

Celeron G1610 outperforms Celeron N3150 by a significant 28% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron G1610 and Celeron N3150 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking24962651
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.01no data
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
Seriesno dataIntel Celeron
Power efficiency1.6511.83
Architecture codenameIvy Bridge (2012−2013)Braswell (2015−2016)
Release date3 December 2012 (11 years ago)1 April 2015 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$388$107

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron G1610 and Celeron N3150 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 cores2 (Dual-core)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads24
Base clock speed2.6 GHz1.6 GHz
Boost clock speed2.6 GHz2.08 GHz
Bus typeno dataIDI
Bus rate5 GT/sno data
L1 cache64 KB (per core)no data
L2 cache256 KB (per core)2 MB
L3 cache2 MB (shared)0 KB
Chip lithography22 nm14 nm
Die size94 mm2no data
Maximum core temperatureno data90 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)65 °Cno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Celeron G1610 and Celeron N3150 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 (Uniprocessor)
SocketFCLGA1155FCBGA1170
Power consumption (TDP)55 Watt6 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron G1610 and Celeron N3150. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2no data
AES-NI-+
AVX+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
My WiFi-no data
Turbo Boost Technology--
Hyper-Threading Technology--
Idle States++
Thermal Monitoring++
Smart Responseno data-
GPIOno data+
Smart Connectno data-
HD Audiono data+
RSTno data-

Security technologies

Celeron G1610 and Celeron N3150 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT--
EDB++
Secure Bootno data+
Secure Key-+
Identity Protection-+
OS Guardno data-
Anti-Theft--

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron G1610 and Celeron N3150 are enumerated here.

VT-d--
VT-x++
VT-ino data-
EPT++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron G1610 and Celeron N3150. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3
Maximum memory size32 GB8 GB
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidth21 GB/sno data
ECC memory support+-

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel® HD Graphics for 3rd Generation Intel® ProcessorsIntel® HD Graphics for Intel® Celeron® Processor N3000 Series
Max video memoryno data8 GB
Quick Sync Video-+
Clear Videono data+
Clear Video HD-+
Graphics max frequency1.05 GHz640 MHz
Execution Unitsno data12
InTru 3D--

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron G1610 and Celeron N3150 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported33
eDPno data+
DisplayPort-+
HDMI-+

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Celeron G1610 and Celeron N3150 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno data+
OpenGLno data+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron G1610 and Celeron N3150.

PCIe version2.02.0
PCI Express lanesno data4
USB revisionno data2.0/3.0
Total number of SATA portsno data2
Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Portsno data2
Number of USB portsno data5
Integrated LANno data-
UARTno 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.

Celeron G1610 0.96
+28%
Celeron N3150 0.75

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.

Celeron G1610 1519
+27.4%
Celeron N3150 1192

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.

Celeron G1610 409
+149%
Celeron N3150 164

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.

Celeron G1610 678
+35.9%
Celeron N3150 499

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.96 0.75
Recency 3 December 2012 1 April 2015
Physical cores 2 4
Threads 2 4
Chip lithography 22 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 55 Watt 6 Watt

Celeron G1610 has a 28% higher aggregate performance score.

Celeron N3150, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, a 57.1% more advanced lithography process, and 816.7% lower power consumption.

The Celeron G1610 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron N3150 in performance tests.

Note that Celeron G1610 is a desktop processor while Celeron N3150 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron G1610 and Celeron N3150, 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 Celeron G1610
Celeron G1610
Intel Celeron N3150
Celeron N3150

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.


3.1 235 votes

Rate Celeron G1610 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 58 votes

Rate Celeron N3150 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron G1610 or Celeron N3150, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.