Intel N3160 vs Celeron N3150 |
VS
Released January, 2015
Intel Celeron N3150
- 1.6 GHz
- Quad core
Reasons to buy the Celeron N3150
 | Better performance per watt 10.68 pt/W |
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?
VS
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
| Newer | Jan, 2016 | vs | Jan, 2015 | Release date a year later | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| |||||||
| Better performance per watt | 10.68 pt/W | vs | 9.3 pt/W | Around 15% better performance per watt | |||
Report a correction
Benchmarks Real world tests of N3160 vs Celeron N3150
GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
PassMark Data courtesy Passmark
PassMark (Single Core)
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | N3160 | vs | Celeron N3150 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clock speed | 1.6 GHz | 1.6 GHz | |
| Turbo clock speed | 2.24 GHz | 2.08 GHz | |
| Cores | Quad core | Quad core | |
features | |||
| Has a NX bit | Yes | Yes | |
| Supports trusted computing | No | No | |
| Has virtualization support | Yes | Yes | |
| Instruction set extensions | |||
| AES | |||
| Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes | Yes | |
power consumption | |||
| TDP | 6W | 6W | |
| Annual home energy cost | 1.45 $/year | 1.45 $/year | |
| Annual commercial energy cost | 5.26 $/year | 5.26 $/year | |
| Performance per watt | 9.3 pt/W | 10.68 pt/W | |
| Typical power consumption | 4.88W | 4.88W | |
bus | |||
| Architecture | FSB | FSB | |
| Number of links | 1 | 1 | |
details | N3160 | vs | Celeron N3150 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Architecture | x86-64 | x86-64 | |
| Threads | 4 | 4 | |
| L2 cache | 2 MB | 2 MB | |
| L2 cache per core | 0.5 MB/core | 0.5 MB/core | |
| Manufacture process | 14 nm | 14 nm | |
| Max CPUs | 1 | 1 | |
overclocking | |||
| Overclocked clock speed | 1.6 GHz | 1.75 GHz | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Water) | 1.6 GHz | 1.6 GHz | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Air) | 1.6 GHz | 1.75 GHz | |
integrated graphics | |||
| GPU | GPU | GPU | |
| Label | Intel® HD Graphics 400 | Intel® HD Graphics | |
| Number of displays supported | 3 | 3 | |
| GPU clock speed | 320 MHz | 320 MHz | |
memory controller | |||
| Memory controller | Built-in | Built-in | |
| Memory type | |||
| DDR3L-1600 | |||
| Channels | Dual Channel | Dual Channel | |
| Supports ECC | No | No | |
| Maximum bandwidth | 25,600 MB/s | 25,600 MB/s | |
| Maximum memory size | 8,192 MB | 8,192 MB | |
 Intel N3160  Report a correction |  Intel Celeron N3150 Report a correction |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $107 | $82 | |
| N3150 vs J1900 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $107 | $161 | |
| N3150 vs N3700 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $107 | ||
| N3150 vs J3455 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $107 | ||
| N3150 vs J3160 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $107 | $107 | |
| N3150 vs N3050 | ||
 | VS | |
| $82 | ||
| N3160 vs J1900 | ||
| | VS | |
| N3160 vs J3160 | ||
Popular Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $305 | $300 | |
| W3520 vs 2500 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| 4200U vs 6410 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $272 | $350 | |
| 4790K vs 6700K | ||
 | VS |  |
| $180 | ||
| 3470 vs 5200 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| 6200U vs 7th Gen A9-9410 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $125 | $50 | |
| 3220 vs 5300 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $275 | $161 | |
| 4005U vs N3540 | ||
Read more
Comments
Showing 2 comments.
