Celeron N3060 vs N3350

VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron N3350
2016
2 cores / 2 threads, 6 Watt
0.70
+66.7%
Celeron N3060
2016
2 cores / 2 threads, 6 Watt
0.42

Celeron N3350 outperforms Celeron N3060 by an impressive 67% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron N3350 and Celeron N3060 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking27222988
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel CeleronIntel Celeron
Power efficiency11.046.62
Architecture codenameApollo Lake (2014−2016)Braswell (2015−2016)
Release date30 August 2016 (8 years ago)15 January 2016 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$24$107

Detailed specifications

Celeron N3350 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 cores2 (Dual-core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads22
Base clock speed1.1 GHz1.6 GHz
Boost clock speed2.4 GHz2.48 GHz
Bus typeno dataIDI
Multiplier11no data
L2 cache1 MB1 MB
L3 cache0 KB0 KB
Chip lithography14 nm14 nm
Maximum core temperature105 °C90 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Celeron N3350 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 configuration1 (Uniprocessor)1 (Uniprocessor)
SocketFCBGA1296FCBGA1170
Power consumption (TDP)6 Watt6 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron N3350 and Celeron N3060. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Turbo Boost Technology--
Hyper-Threading Technology--
Idle States++
Thermal Monitoring++
Smart Response--
GPIO++
Smart Connect--
HD Audio++
RST--

Security technologies

Celeron N3350 and Celeron N3060 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+-
EDB++
Secure Boot++
Secure Key++
MPX+-
Identity Protection++
OS Guard+-
Anti-Theft--

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron N3350 and Celeron N3060 are enumerated here.

VT-d+-
VT-x++
VT-i--
EPT++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron N3350 and Celeron N3060. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3, DDR4DDR3
Maximum memory size8 GB8 GB
Max memory channels22

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Intel HD Graphics 500Intel HD Graphics 400 (Braswell) (320 - 700 MHz)
Max video memory8 GB8 GB
Quick Sync Video++
Clear Video++
Clear Video HD++
Graphics max frequency650 MHz600 MHz
Execution Units1212
InTru 3D--

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron N3350 and Celeron N3060 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported33
eDP++
DisplayPort++
HDMI++
MIPI-DSI+no data

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Celeron N3350 and Celeron N3060 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectX++
OpenGL++

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron N3350 and Celeron N3060.

PCIe version2.02.0
PCI Express lanes64
USB revision2.0/3.02.0/3.0
Total number of SATA ports22
Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Ports22
Number of USB ports85
Integrated LAN--
UART++

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
+66.7%
Celeron N3060 0.42

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 1106
+66.3%
Celeron N3060 665

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
+17.6%
Celeron N3060 1267

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
+10.7%
Celeron N3060 2397

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
Celeron N3060 43.13
+5.5%

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.

Celeron N3350 1
+33.7%
Celeron N3060 1

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
+17.2%
Celeron N3060 73

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
+21.1%
Celeron N3060 38

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R11.5 is an old benchmark 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 loads a single thread with ray tracing to render a glossy room full of crystal spheres and light sources.

Celeron N3350 0.59
+34.1%
Celeron N3060 0.44

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
+44.4%
Celeron N3060 0.5

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
+13.8%
Celeron N3060 5

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
+14.4%
Celeron N3060 28

Geekbench 3 32-bit multi-core

Celeron N3350 2468
+44.5%
Celeron N3060 1708

Geekbench 3 32-bit single-core

Celeron N3350 1328
+45.4%
Celeron N3060 913

Geekbench 4.0 64-bit multi-core

Celeron N3350 2589
+41.2%
Celeron N3060 1834

Geekbench 4.0 64-bit single-core

Celeron N3350 1500
+38%
Celeron N3060 1087

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.70 0.42
Integrated graphics card 0.77 0.45
Recency 30 August 2016 15 January 2016

Celeron N3350 has a 66.7% higher aggregate performance score, 71.1% faster integrated GPU, and an age advantage of 7 months.

The Celeron N3350 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron N3060 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron N3350 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 N3350
Celeron N3350
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.


2.8 961 vote

Rate Celeron N3350 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 N3350 or Celeron N3060, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.