Celeron 3865U vs m5-6Y57

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Core m5-6Y57
2015
2 cores / 4 threads, 4 Watt
1.48
+78.3%
Celeron 3865U
2017
2 cores / 2 threads, 15 Watt
0.83

Core m5-6Y57 outperforms Celeron 3865U by an impressive 78% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core m5-6Y57 and Celeron 3865U processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking21562580
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel Core m5Intel Celeron
Power efficiency28.015.24
Architecture codenameSkylake-Y (2015)Kaby Lake-U (2017)
Release date1 September 2015 (9 years ago)3 January 2017 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$281$107

Detailed specifications

Core m5-6Y57 and Celeron 3865U 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)
Threads42
Base clock speed1.1 GHz1.8 GHz
Boost clock speed2.8 GHz1.8 GHz
Bus typeDMI 3.0OPI
Bus rate4 GT/s4 GT/s
Multiplier1122
L1 cache64 KB (per core)64K (per core)
L2 cache256 KB (per core)256K (per core)
L3 cache4 MB (shared)2 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm14 nm
Die size98.57 mm298.7 mm2
Maximum core temperature100 °C100 °C
Number of transistors1750 Millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Core m5-6Y57 and Celeron 3865U 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)
SocketFCBGA1515FCBGA1356,FPBGA1356
Power consumption (TDP)4.5 Watt15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core m5-6Y57 and Celeron 3865U. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2
AES-NI++
AVX++
vPro++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Speed Shiftno data+
My WiFi++
Turbo Boost Technology2.0-
Hyper-Threading Technology++
TSX+-
Idle States++
Thermal Monitoring++
Flex Memory Access++
SIPP+-
Smart Response++

Security technologies

Core m5-6Y57 and Celeron 3865U technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+-
EDB++
Secure Key++
MPX++
SGXYes with Intel® MEYes with Intel® ME
OS Guard++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core m5-6Y57 and Celeron 3865U are enumerated here.

AMD-V++
VT-d++
VT-x++
EPT++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core m5-6Y57 and Celeron 3865U. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3, DDR4
Maximum memory size16 GB32 GB
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidth29.861 GB/s34.134 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Intel HD Graphics 515Intel HD Graphics 610
Max video memory16 GB32 GB
Quick Sync Video++
Clear Video++
Clear Video HD++
Graphics max frequency900 MHz900 MHz
InTru 3D+no data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Core m5-6Y57 and Celeron 3865U integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported33
eDP++
DisplayPort++
HDMI++
DVI++

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by Core m5-6Y57 and Celeron 3865U integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

4K resolution support++
Max resolution over HDMI 1.44096x2304@24Hz4096x2304@24Hz
Max resolution over eDP3840x2160@60Hz4096x2304@60Hz
Max resolution over DisplayPort3840x2160@60Hz4096x2304@60Hz
Max resolution over VGAN/Ano data

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Core m5-6Y57 and Celeron 3865U integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectX1212
OpenGL4.54.4

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core m5-6Y57 and Celeron 3865U.

PCIe version3.02.0
PCI Express lanes1010

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.

m5-6Y57 1.48
+78.3%
Celeron 3865U 0.83

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.

m5-6Y57 2345
+77.5%
Celeron 3865U 1321

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.

m5-6Y57 3849
+34.9%
Celeron 3865U 2853

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.

m5-6Y57 6428
+18.5%
Celeron 3865U 5425

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.

m5-6Y57 21.9
+79.7%
Celeron 3865U 39.36

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.

m5-6Y57 2
+19.3%
Celeron 3865U 2

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

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

m5-6Y57 180
+26.8%
Celeron 3865U 142

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.

m5-6Y57 101
+40.3%
Celeron 3865U 72

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.

m5-6Y57 1.13
+31.4%
Celeron 3865U 0.86

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.

m5-6Y57 1.5
+85.2%
Celeron 3865U 0.8

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.  

m5-6Y57 12
+8.5%
Celeron 3865U 11

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.  

m5-6Y57 93
+70.2%
Celeron 3865U 54

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.

m5-6Y57 2264
+104%
Celeron 3865U 1108

Geekbench 3 32-bit multi-core

m5-6Y57 5244
+62.7%
Celeron 3865U 3224

Geekbench 3 32-bit single-core

m5-6Y57 2672
+45%
Celeron 3865U 1843

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.48 0.83
Integrated graphics card 1.64 1.85
Recency 1 September 2015 3 January 2017
Threads 4 2
Power consumption (TDP) 4 Watt 15 Watt

m5-6Y57 has a 78.3% higher aggregate performance score, 100% more threads, and 275% lower power consumption.

Celeron 3865U, on the other hand, has 12.8% faster integrated GPU, and an age advantage of 1 year.

The Core m5-6Y57 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron 3865U in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core m5-6Y57 and Celeron 3865U, 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 Core m5-6Y57
Core m5-6Y57
Intel Celeron 3865U
Celeron 3865U

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.


4 53 votes

Rate Core m5-6Y57 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 116 votes

Rate Celeron 3865U on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core m5-6Y57 or Celeron 3865U, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.