Atom Z3770 vs Celeron N3160
Atom Z3770
Celeron N3160
Performance Spectrum - CPU
About PassMark
PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (PassMark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The Atom Z3770 is positioned at rank 702 and the Celeron N3160 is on rank 697, so the Celeron N3160 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Atom Z3770
Performance Per Dollar Celeron N3160
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Atom Z3770 | Celeron N3160 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ✅ Superior gaming performance | ❌ Lower gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | Equivalent pricing | Equivalent pricing |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Bay Trail-T (2013−2014) / 22 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Braswell (2015−2016) / 14 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Atom Z3770 | Celeron N3160 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | Equivalent pricing | Equivalent pricing |
Performance Check
To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.
Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Atom Z3770 and Celeron N3160
Atom Z3770
The Atom Z3770 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 27 September 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Bay Trail-T (2013−2014) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.46 GHz, with boost up to 2.39 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: UTFCBGA1380. Thermal design power (TDP): 8 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,189 points. Launch price was $37.
Celeron N3160
The Celeron N3160 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 15 January 2016 (9 years ago). It is based on the Braswell (2015−2016) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.6 GHz, with boost up to 2.24 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 2 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1170. Thermal design power (TDP): 6 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,195 points. Launch price was $107.
Processing Power
Both the Atom Z3770 and Celeron N3160 share an identical 4-core/4-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.39 GHz on the Atom Z3770 versus 2.24 GHz on the Celeron N3160 — a 6.5% clock advantage for the Atom Z3770 (base: 1.46 GHz vs 1.6 GHz). The Atom Z3770 uses the Bay Trail-T (2013−2014) architecture (22 nm), while the Celeron N3160 uses Braswell (2015−2016) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Atom Z3770 scores 1,189 against the Celeron N3160's 1,195 — a 0.5% lead for the Celeron N3160. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.
| Feature | Atom Z3770 | Celeron N3160 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 4 / 4 | 4 / 4 |
| Boost Clock | 2.39 GHz+7% | 2.24 GHz |
| Base Clock | 1.46 GHz | 1.6 GHz+10% |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 512K (per core) | 2 MB+300% |
| Process | 22 nm | 14 nm-36% |
| Architecture | Bay Trail-T (2013−2014) | Braswell (2015−2016) |
| PassMark | 1,189 | 1,195 |
Memory & Platform
The Atom Z3770 uses the UTFCBGA1380 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron N3160 uses FCBGA1170 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches LPDDR3-1066 on the Atom Z3770 versus 1600 on the Celeron N3160 — the Celeron N3160 supports 199.3% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron N3160 supports up to 8 of RAM compared to 4 GB — 66.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 0 (Atom Z3770) vs 4 (Celeron N3160) — the Celeron N3160 offers 4 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Intel FC-UTBGA592 (Atom Z3770) and FCBGA1170 (Celeron N3160).
| Feature | Atom Z3770 | Celeron N3160 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | UTFCBGA1380 | FCBGA1170 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 2.0 | PCIe 3.0+50% |
| Max RAM Speed | LPDDR3-1066 | 1600+53233% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 4 GB+52428700% | 8 |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | 4 |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: not specified (Atom Z3770) / true (Celeron N3160). Both include integrated graphics — Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail) (Atom Z3770) and Intel HD Graphics 400 (Celeron N3160) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Direct competitor: Celeron N3160 rivals AMD E2-9010.
| Feature | Atom Z3770 | Celeron N3160 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | Yes |
| IGPU Model | Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail) | Intel HD Graphics 400 |
| Unlocked | — | No |
| AVX-512 | — | No |
| Virtualization | — | true |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Atom Z3770 and Celeron N3160
