i3-N305 vs Celeron M 900

Primary details

Comparing Celeron M 900 and Core i3-N305 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the rankingnot rated1065
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel Celeron Mno data
Power efficiencyno data39.56
Architecture codenamePenryn (2008−2011)Alder Lake-N (2023)
Release date1 April 2009 (15 years ago)3 January 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$70$309

Detailed specifications

Celeron M 900 and Core i3-N305 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)8 (Octa-Core)
Threads18
Base clock speedno data0.1 GHz
Boost clock speed2.2 GHz3.8 GHz
Bus rate800 MHzno data
L1 cacheno data96 KB (per core)
L2 cache1 MB2 MB (per module)
L3 cacheno data6 MB (shared)
Chip lithography45 nmIntel 7 nm
Die size107 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature105 °C105 °C
Number of transistors410 Millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+

Compatibility

Information on Celeron M 900 and Core i3-N305 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
SocketPGA478FCBGA1264
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M 900 and Core i3-N305. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2
AES-NI-+
FMA-+
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Speed Shiftno data+
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Thermal Monitoring-+
GPIOno data+

Security technologies

Celeron M 900 and Core i3-N305 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+
OS Guardno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron M 900 and Core i3-N305 are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron M 900 and Core i3-N305. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR4, DDR5
Maximum memory sizeno data16 GB
Max memory channelsno data1

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataIntel UHD Graphics
Quick Sync Video-+
Graphics max frequencyno data1.25 GHz
Execution Unitsno data32

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron M 900 and Core i3-N305 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data3

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by Celeron M 900 and Core i3-N305 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

4K resolution supportno data+
Max resolution over HDMI 1.4no data4096 x 2160@60Hz
Max resolution over DisplayPortno data4096 x 2160@60Hz

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Celeron M 900 and Core i3-N305 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno data12.1
OpenGLno data4.6

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron M 900 and Core i3-N305.

PCIe versionno data3.0
PCI Express lanesno data9
USB revisionno data2.0/3.2

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.



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
i3-N305 9955
+7993%

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
i3-N305 5651
+169%

3DMark06 CPU

3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.

Celeron M 900 1000
i3-N305 9081
+808%

Pros & cons summary


Recency 1 April 2009 3 January 2023
Physical cores 1 8
Threads 1 8
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 15 Watt

i3-N305 has an age advantage of 13 years, 700% more physical cores and 700% more threads, and 133.3% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Celeron M 900 and Core i3-N305. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M 900 and Core i3-N305, 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 Core i3-N305
Core i3-N305

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
3.7 625 votes

Rate Core i3-N305 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 Core i3-N305, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.