Celeron M 560 vs Celeron N3450

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.

Celeron M 560 vs Celeron N3450 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Celeron M 560 vs Celeron N3450: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

Celeron M 560

2008

Why buy it

✅+1.4% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 1W instead of 6W, a 5W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $86 MSRP, while Celeron N3450 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron N3450 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Celeron N3450

2016

Why buy it

✅100+% more PCIe lanes (6 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel HD Graphics 500, while Celeron M 560 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,981 vs 2,008).
❌500% higher power demand at 6W vs 1W.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron M 560 better than Celeron N3450?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Celeron N3450 is ahead with a 1.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Celeron M 560 pulls ahead with 1.4% better PassMark.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Celeron M 560 is the stronger fit. You are getting 1.4% better PassMark, backed by 1 cores and 1 threads.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Celeron M 560 is the better buy right now. Celeron M 560 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $86 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 1.4% better PassMark. The compromise is that Celeron N3450 is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 1.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (23.3 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Celeron N3450 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2016 vs 2008). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Celeron M 560 vs Celeron N3450 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Celeron M 560

The Celeron M 560 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Merom (2006−2008) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 2.13 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: PGA478. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Passmark benchmark score: 2,008 points. Launch price was $69.

Celeron N3450

The Celeron N3450 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 30 August 2016 (9 years ago). It is based on the Apollo Lake (2014−2016) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.1 GHz, with boost up to 2.2 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 2 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1296. Thermal design power (TDP): 6 Watt. Memory support: DDR3, DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 1,981 points. Launch price was $107.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron M 560 packs 1 cores / 1 threads, while the Celeron N3450 offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the Celeron N3450 has 3 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.13 GHz on the Celeron M 560 versus 2.2 GHz on the Celeron N3450 — a 3.2% clock advantage for the Celeron N3450. The Celeron M 560 uses the Merom (2006−2008) architecture (65 nm), while the Celeron N3450 uses Apollo Lake (2014−2016) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron M 560 scores 2,008 against the Celeron N3450's 1,981 — a 1.4% lead for the Celeron M 560.

Feature	Celeron M 560	Celeron N3450
Cores / Threads	1 / 1	4 / 4+300%
Boost Clock	2.13 GHz	2.2 GHz+3%
Base Clock	—	1.1 GHz
L3 Cache	—	0 kB
L2 Cache	1 MB	2 MB+100%
Process	65 nm	14 nm-78%
Architecture	Merom (2006−2008)	Apollo Lake (2014−2016)
PassMark	2,008+1%	1,981

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron M 560 uses the PGA478 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Celeron N3450 uses FCBGA1296 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 667 on the Celeron M 560 versus 2400 on the Celeron N3450 — the Celeron N3450 supports 259.8% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron N3450 supports up to 8 of RAM compared to 4 — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 0 (Celeron M 560) vs 6 (Celeron N3450) — the Celeron N3450 offers 6 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: GL960,GM965 (Celeron M 560) and FCBGA1296 (Celeron N3450).

Feature	Celeron M 560	Celeron N3450
Socket	PGA478	FCBGA1296
PCIe Generation	PCIe 1.1	PCIe 3.0+173%
Max RAM Speed	667	2400+260%
Max RAM Capacity	4	8+100%
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	0	6

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: false (Celeron M 560) vs true (Celeron N3450). The Celeron N3450 includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics 500), while the Celeron M 560 requires a dedicated GPU. Direct competitor: Celeron M 560 rivals Mobile Sempron 3600+; Celeron N3450 rivals AMD A4-9120.