Celeron N4100 vs m7-6Y75

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Core m7-6Y75
2015
2 cores / 4 threads, 4 Watt
1.47
Celeron N4100
2017
4 cores / 4 threads, 6 Watt
1.54
+4.8%

Celeron N4100 outperforms Core m7-6Y75 by a small 5% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core m7-6Y75 and Celeron N4100 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking21712132
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel Core m7Intel Celeron
Power efficiency27.8124.27
Architecture codenameSkylake-Y (2015)Goldmont Plus (2017)
Release date1 September 2015 (9 years ago)11 December 2017 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$393$107

Detailed specifications

Core m7-6Y75 and Celeron N4100 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)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads44
Base clock speed1.2 GHz1.1 GHz
Boost clock speed3.1 GHz2.4 GHz
Bus typeDMI 3.0no data
Bus rate4 GT/sno data
Multiplier1211
L1 cache64 KB (per core)256 KB
L2 cache256 KB (per core)4 MB
L3 cache4 MB (shared)4 MB
Chip lithography14 nm14 nm
Die size98.57 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature100 °C105 deg C
Number of transistors1750 Millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+

Compatibility

Information on Core m7-6Y75 and Celeron N4100 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)
SocketFCBGA1515FCBGA1090
Power consumption (TDP)4.5 Watt6 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core m7-6Y75 and Celeron N4100. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2no data
AES-NI++
AVX+-
vPro+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Speed Shiftno data-
My WiFi+no data
Turbo Boost Technology2.0-
Hyper-Threading Technology+-
TSX+-
Idle States++
Thermal Monitoring++
Flex Memory Access+no data
SIPP+-
Smart Response+-
GPIOno data+
Turbo Boost Max 3.0no data-

Security technologies

Core m7-6Y75 and Celeron N4100 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+no data
EDB++
Secure Key++
MPX++
Identity Protection-+
SGXYes with Intel® MEYes with Intel® ME
OS Guard++
Anti-Theftno data-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core m7-6Y75 and Celeron N4100 are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core m7-6Y75 and Celeron N4100. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR4
Maximum memory size16 GB8 GB
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidth29.861 GB/s38.397 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Intel HD Graphics 515Intel UHD Graphics 600
Max video memory16 GB8 GB
Quick Sync Video+-
Clear Video+no data
Clear Video HD+no data
Graphics max frequency1 GHz700 MHz
Execution Unitsno data12
InTru 3D+no data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Core m7-6Y75 and Celeron N4100 integrated GPUs.

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

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by Core m7-6Y75 and Celeron N4100 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

4K resolution support++
Max resolution over HDMI 1.44096x2304@24Hzno data
Max resolution over eDP3840x2160@60Hzno data
Max resolution over DisplayPort3840x2160@60Hzno data

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Core m7-6Y75 and Celeron N4100 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectX12+
OpenGL4.5+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core m7-6Y75 and Celeron N4100.

PCIe version3.02.0
PCI Express lanes106
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 data8
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.

m7-6Y75 1.47
Celeron N4100 1.54
+4.8%

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.

m7-6Y75 2337
Celeron N4100 2453
+5%

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.

m7-6Y75 3854
+91.5%
Celeron N4100 2013

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.

m7-6Y75 6302
+6.7%
Celeron N4100 5904

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.

m7-6Y75 2730
Celeron N4100 2805
+2.7%

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.

m7-6Y75 19
+2.2%
Celeron N4100 19.41

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.

m7-6Y75 2
+13.3%
Celeron N4100 2

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

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

m7-6Y75 205
+3.5%
Celeron N4100 198

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.

m7-6Y75 102
+48.7%
Celeron N4100 69

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.

m7-6Y75 1.08
+30.1%
Celeron N4100 0.83

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.

m7-6Y75 1.7
Celeron N4100 1.7

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.

m7-6Y75 1625
+42.6%
Celeron N4100 1139

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.  

m7-6Y75 16
+31.4%
Celeron N4100 12

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.  

m7-6Y75 89
+52.9%
Celeron N4100 58

Geekbench 3 32-bit multi-core

m7-6Y75 5457
+8.2%
Celeron N4100 5042

Geekbench 3 32-bit single-core

m7-6Y75 2755
+69.1%
Celeron N4100 1629

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.47 1.54
Integrated graphics card 1.65 0.87
Recency 1 September 2015 11 December 2017
Physical cores 2 4
Power consumption (TDP) 4 Watt 6 Watt

m7-6Y75 has 89.7% faster integrated GPU, and 50% lower power consumption.

Celeron N4100, on the other hand, has a 4.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, and 100% more physical cores.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Core m7-6Y75 and Celeron N4100.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core m7-6Y75 and Celeron N4100, 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 m7-6Y75
Core m7-6Y75
Intel Celeron N4100
Celeron N4100

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.


3.7 33 votes

Rate Core m7-6Y75 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 432 votes

Rate Celeron N4100 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core m7-6Y75 or Celeron N4100, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.