Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?

Thanks for adding your opinion. Follow us on Facebook to stay up to date with the latest news!
VS

Intel Celeron N2930

Front view of Intel Celeron N2930
Front view of Intel Celeron 3765U

Intel Celeron 3765U

CPUBoss Winner
Join the discussion

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Celeron N2930

Reasons to consider the
Intel Celeron N2930

Report a correction
Much more l2 cache 2 MB vs 0.5 MB 4x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
More cores 4 vs 2 Twice as many cores; run more applications at once
More l2 cache per core 0.5 MB/core vs 0.25 MB/core 2x more l2 cache per core
Lower typical power consumption 6.09W vs 12.19W 2x lower typical power consumption
More threads 4 vs 2 Twice as many threads
Better overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.16 GHz vs 1.9 GHz Around 15% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Lower annual home energy cost 1.81 $/year vs 3.61 $/year 2x lower annual home energy cost
Lower annual commercial energy cost 6.57 $/year vs 13.14 $/year 2x lower annual commercial energy cost
Better overclocked clock speed (Water) 2.16 GHz vs 1.9 GHz Around 15% better overclocked clock speed (Water)
Front view of Intel Celeron 3765U

Reasons to consider the
Intel Celeron 3765U

Report a correction
Significantly newer manufacturing process 14 nm vs 22 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Much better performance per dollar 0.96 pt/$ vs 0.44 pt/$ Around 2.2x better performance per dollar
Significantly better PassMark (Single core) score 1,092 vs 465 More than 2.2x better PassMark (Single core) score
More number of displays supported 3 vs 2 1 more number of displays supported
Newer Apr, 2015 vs Feb, 2014 Release date over 1 years later

Benchmarks Real world tests of Celeron N2930 vs 3765U

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

Celeron N2930
1,638
Celeron 3765U
2,042

PassMark (Single Core)

Celeron N2930
465
Celeron 3765U
1,092

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

 Celeron N2930  vs
3765U 
Clock speed 1.83 GHz 1.9 GHz
Cores Quad core Dual core

features
Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Supports trusted computing No No
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE2
MMX
SSE4
SSE3
EM64T
SSE
SSE4.1
SSE4.2
Supplemental SSE3
AES
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

power consumption
TDP 7.5W 15W
Annual home energy cost 1.81 $/year 3.61 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 6.57 $/year 13.14 $/year
Performance per watt 7.05 pt/W 6.87 pt/W
Typical power consumption 6.09W 12.19W

bus
Architecture FSB DMI 2.0
Number of links 1 1

details

 Celeron N2930  vs
3765U 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 4 2
L2 cache 2 MB 0.5 MB
L2 cache per core 0.5 MB/core 0.25 MB/core
Manufacture process 22 nm 14 nm
Max CPUs 1 1

overclocking
Overclocked clock speed 2.16 GHz 1.9 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 2.16 GHz 1.9 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.16 GHz 1.9 GHz

integrated graphics
GPU GPU GPU
Label Intel® HD Graphics Intel® HD Graphics
Number of displays supported 2 3
GPU clock speed 313 MHz 300 MHz
Turbo clock speed 854 MHz 850 MHz

memory controller
Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Memory type
DDR3
Channels Dual Channel Dual Channel
Maximum bandwidth 12,800 MB/s 12,800 MB/s
Maximum memory size 8,192 MB 16,384 MB
Intel Celeron N2930
Report a correction
Intel Celeron 3765U
Report a correction

Read more

Comments

comments powered by Disqus

features

information

  • terms and privacy
  • about
  • blog

on the web

CPUBoss