Athlon 300U vs Celeron N3350

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon

Aggregate performance score

Celeron N3350
2016
2 cores / 2 threads, 6 Watt
0.70
Athlon 300U
2019
2 cores / 4 threads, 15 Watt
2.43
+247%

Athlon 300U outperforms Celeron N3350 by a whopping 247% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron N3350 and Athlon 300U processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking27071759
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel CeleronAMD Athlon
Power efficiency11.0415.33
Architecture codenameApollo Lake (2014−2016)Raven Ridge 2 (2019)
Release date30 August 2016 (8 years ago)6 January 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$24no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron N3350 and Athlon 300U 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)2 (Dual-core)
Threads24
Base clock speed1.1 GHz2.4 GHz
Boost clock speed2.4 GHz3.3 GHz
Bus typeno dataPCIe 3.0
Multiplier1124
L1 cacheno data128K (per core)
L2 cache1 MB512K (per core)
L3 cache0 KB4 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm14 nm
Die sizeno data209.78 mm2
Maximum core temperature105 °Cno data
Number of transistorsno data4940 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+

Compatibility

Information on Celeron N3350 and Athlon 300U 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 configuration1 (Uniprocessor)1 (Uniprocessor)
SocketFCBGA1296FP5
Power consumption (TDP)6 Watt15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron N3350 and Athlon 300U. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataXFR, FMA3, SSE 4.2, AVX2, SMT
AES-NI++
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+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
Smart Connect-no data
HD Audio+no data
RST-no data

Security technologies

Celeron N3350 and Athlon 300U technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+no data
EDB+no data
Secure Boot+no data
Secure Key+no data
MPX+-
Identity Protection+-
OS Guard+no data
Anti-Theft-no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron N3350 and Athlon 300U are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
VT-d+no data
VT-x+no data
VT-i-no data
EPT+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron N3350 and Athlon 300U. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3, DDR4DDR4 Dual-channel
Maximum memory size8 GB64 GB
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidthno data38.397 GB/s
ECC memory support-+

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Intel HD Graphics 500AMD Radeon RX Vega 3 ( - 1000 MHz)
Max video memory8 GBno data
Quick Sync Video+-
Clear Video+no data
Clear Video HD+no data
Graphics max frequency650 MHzno data
Execution Units12no data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron N3350 and Athlon 300U integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported3no data
eDP+no data
DisplayPort+-
HDMI+-
MIPI-DSI+no data

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Celeron N3350 and Athlon 300U integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectX+no data
OpenGL+no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron N3350 and Athlon 300U.

PCIe version2.03.0
PCI Express lanes612
USB revision2.0/3.0no data
Total number of SATA ports2no data
Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Ports2no data
Number of USB ports8no data
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.

Celeron N3350 0.70
Athlon 300U 2.43
+247%

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 N3350 1107
Athlon 300U 3867
+249%

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 N3350 1490
Athlon 300U 3968
+166%

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

Celeron N3350 2654
Athlon 300U 8724
+229%

wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

Celeron N3350 45.5
Athlon 300U 15.44
+195%

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.

Celeron N3350 85
Athlon 300U 308
+262%

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.

Celeron N3350 46
Athlon 300U 119
+159%

TrueCrypt AES

TrueCrypt is a discontinued piece of software that was widely used for on-the-fly-encryption of disk partitions, now superseded by VeraCrypt. It contains several embedded performance tests, one of them being TrueCrypt AES, which measures data encryption speed using AES algorithm. Result is encryption speed in gigabytes per second.

Celeron N3350 0.7
Athlon 300U 1.9
+192%

x264 encoding pass 2

x264 Pass 2 is a slower variant of x264 video compression that produces a variable bit rate output file, which results in better quality since the higher bit rate is used when it is needed more. Benchmark result is still measured in frames per second.  

Celeron N3350 6
Athlon 300U 19
+198%

x264 encoding pass 1

x264 version 4.0 is a video encoding benchmark uses MPEG 4 x264 compression method to compress a sample HD (720p) video. Pass 1 is a faster variant that produces a constant bit rate output file. Its result is measured in frames per second, which means how many frames of the source video file were encoded per second.  

Celeron N3350 33
Athlon 300U 89
+173%

WinRAR 4.0

WinRAR 4.0 is an outdated version of a popular file archiver. It contains an internal speed test, using 'Best' setting of RAR compression on large chunks of randomly generated data. Its results are measured in kilobytes per second.

Celeron N3350 616
Athlon 300U 1623
+163%

Geekbench 3 32-bit multi-core

Celeron N3350 2468
Athlon 300U 6134
+149%

Geekbench 3 32-bit single-core

Celeron N3350 1328
Athlon 300U 2919
+120%

Geekbench 4.0 64-bit multi-core

Celeron N3350 2589
Athlon 300U 5763
+123%

Geekbench 4.0 64-bit single-core

Celeron N3350 1500
Athlon 300U 3213
+114%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.70 2.43
Integrated graphics card 0.77 2.98
Recency 30 August 2016 6 January 2019
Threads 2 4
Power consumption (TDP) 6 Watt 15 Watt

Celeron N3350 has 150% lower power consumption.

Athlon 300U, on the other hand, has a 247.1% higher aggregate performance score, 287% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 2 years, and 100% more threads.

The Athlon 300U is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron N3350 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron N3350 and Athlon 300U, 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 N3350
Celeron N3350
AMD Athlon 300U
Athlon 300U

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.


2.8 956 votes

Rate Celeron N3350 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 459 votes

Rate Athlon 300U on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron N3350 or Athlon 300U, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.