Celeron 2957U vs Pentium N3510

Aggregate performance score

Pentium N3510
2013
4 cores / 4 threads, 7 Watt
0.55
+1.9%
Celeron 2957U
2014
2 cores / 2 threads, 15 Watt
0.54

Pentium N3510 outperforms Celeron 2957U by a minimal 2% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Pentium N3510 and Celeron 2957U processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking28282839
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel PentiumIntel Celeron
Power efficiency6.943.41
Architecture codenameBay Trail-M (2013−2014)Haswell (2013−2015)
Release date1 December 2013 (10 years ago)1 January 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$161$107

Detailed specifications

Pentium N3510 and Celeron 2957U 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads42
Base clock speed2 GHz1.4 GHz
Boost clock speed2 GHz1.4 GHz
Bus rateno data5 GT/s
L1 cache224 KB128 KB
L2 cache2 MB512 KB
L3 cache2 MB2 MB
Chip lithography22 nm22 nm
Maximum core temperature100 °C100 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Pentium N3510 and Celeron 2957U 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 configuration11
SocketFCBGA1170FCBGA1168
Power consumption (TDP)7.5 Watt15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Pentium N3510 and Celeron 2957U. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2
AES-NI+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Turbo Boost Technology--
Hyper-Threading Technology--
Idle States++
Thermal Monitoring-+
Smart Responseno data-
GPIOno data+
Smart Connect++
FDIno data-
AMTno data9.5
Matrix Storageno data-
HD Audiono data+
RST-+

Security technologies

Pentium N3510 and Celeron 2957U technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
EDB++
Secure Key++
OS Guardno data-
Anti-Theft--

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Pentium N3510 and Celeron 2957U are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
VT-d--
VT-x++
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Pentium N3510 and Celeron 2957U. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3L-1333DDR3
Maximum memory size8 GB16 GB
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidthno data25.6 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel® HD Graphics for Intel Atom® Processor Z3700 SeriesIntel® HD Graphics for 4th Generation Intel® Processors
Quick Sync Video-+
Clear Videono data+
Graphics max frequency750 MHz1 GHz

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Pentium N3510 and Celeron 2957U integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported23
eDPno data+
DisplayPort-+
HDMI-+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Pentium N3510 and Celeron 2957U.

PCIe version2.02.0
PCI Express lanes410
PCI supportno data-
USB revision3.0 and 2.03.0
Total number of SATA ports22
Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Portsno data2
Integrated IDEno data-
Number of USB ports54
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.

Pentium N3510 0.55
+1.9%
Celeron 2957U 0.54

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.

Pentium N3510 878
+2.7%
Celeron 2957U 855

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.

Pentium N3510 1040
Celeron 2957U 2077
+99.7%

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.

Pentium N3510 3670
Celeron 2957U 4043
+10.2%

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.

Pentium N3510 30
+78.3%
Celeron 2957U 53.5

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.

Pentium N3510 1
+23.3%
Celeron 2957U 1

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

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

Pentium N3510 123
+17.1%
Celeron 2957U 105

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.

Pentium N3510 33
Celeron 2957U 55
+66.7%

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.

Pentium N3510 0.38
Celeron 2957U 0.62
+63.2%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.55 0.54
Recency 1 December 2013 1 January 2014
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Power consumption (TDP) 7 Watt 15 Watt

Pentium N3510 has a 1.9% higher aggregate performance score, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and 114.3% lower power consumption.

Celeron 2957U, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 month.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Pentium N3510 and Celeron 2957U.


Should you still have questions on choice between Pentium N3510 and Celeron 2957U, 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 Pentium N3510
Pentium N3510
Intel Celeron 2957U
Celeron 2957U

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.


3.6 14 votes

Rate Pentium N3510 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.5 70 votes

Rate Celeron 2957U on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Pentium N3510 or Celeron 2957U, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.