Celeron N3060 vs M 900

VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron M 900
2009
1 core / 1 thread, 35 Watt
0.08
Celeron N3060
2016
2 cores / 2 threads, 6 Watt
0.42
+425%

Celeron N3060 outperforms Celeron M 900 by a whopping 425% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron M 900 and Celeron N3060 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking34012988
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel Celeron MIntel Celeron
Power efficiency0.226.62
Architecture codenamePenryn (2008−2011)Braswell (2015−2016)
Release date1 April 2009 (15 years ago)15 January 2016 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$70$107

Detailed specifications

Celeron M 900 and Celeron N3060 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 cores1 (Single-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads12
Base clock speedno data1.6 GHz
Boost clock speed2.2 GHz2.48 GHz
Bus typeno dataIDI
Bus rate800 MHzno data
L2 cache1 MB1 MB
L3 cacheno data0 KB
Chip lithography45 nm14 nm
Die size107 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature105 °C90 °C
Number of transistors410 Millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Celeron M 900 and Celeron N3060 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 configurationno data1 (Uniprocessor)
SocketPGA478FCBGA1170
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt6 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M 900 and Celeron N3060. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Smart Responseno data-
GPIOno data+
Smart Connectno data-
HD Audiono data+
RSTno data-

Security technologies

Celeron M 900 and Celeron N3060 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
EDBno data+
Secure Bootno data+
Secure Keyno data+
Identity Protection-+
OS Guardno data-
Anti-Theftno data-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron M 900 and Celeron N3060 are enumerated here.

VT-dno data-
VT-xno data+
VT-ino data-
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron M 900 and Celeron N3060. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR3
Maximum memory sizeno data8 GB
Max memory channelsno data2

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataIntel HD Graphics 400 (Braswell) (320 - 700 MHz)
Max video memoryno data8 GB
Quick Sync Video-+
Clear Videono data+
Clear Video HDno data+
Graphics max frequencyno data600 MHz
Execution Unitsno data12

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron M 900 and Celeron N3060 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data3
eDPno data+
DisplayPort-+
HDMI-+

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Celeron M 900 and Celeron N3060 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno data+
OpenGLno data+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron M 900 and Celeron N3060.

PCIe versionno data2.0
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 M 900 0.08
Celeron N3060 0.42
+425%

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 M 900 123
Celeron N3060 665
+441%

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.

Celeron M 900 2101
+65.8%
Celeron N3060 1267

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.08 0.42
Recency 1 April 2009 15 January 2016
Physical cores 1 2
Threads 1 2
Chip lithography 45 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 6 Watt

Celeron N3060 has a 425% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, a 221.4% more advanced lithography process, and 483.3% lower power consumption.

The Celeron N3060 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron M 900 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M 900 and Celeron N3060, 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 M 900
Celeron M 900
Intel Celeron N3060
Celeron N3060

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.


2.8 21 vote

Rate Celeron M 900 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.4 799 votes

Rate Celeron N3060 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron M 900 or Celeron N3060, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.