Celeron N3010
VS
Celeron B730

Celeron N3010 vs Celeron B730

Intel

Celeron N3010

2 Cores2 Thrd4 WWMax: 2.24 GHz2016
VS
Intel

Celeron B730

1 Cores2 Thrd35 WWMax: 1.8 GHz2012

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 Celeron N3010 is positioned at rank 1164 and the Celeron B730 is on rank 1075, so the Celeron B730 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar Celeron N3010

#1152
Atom x5-Z8300
MSRP: $20|Avg: N/A
4271%
#1153
Atom Z3735G
MSRP: $17|Avg: N/A
4208%
#1154
Core i5-480M
MSRP: $81|Avg: $77
3863%
#1155
Core i5-460M
MSRP: $80|Avg: $129
3846%
#1156
Core i5-2540M
MSRP: $266|Avg: $10
3810%
#1158
Core i5-450M
MSRP: $32|Avg: $31
3680%
#1159
Core i3-380M
MSRP: $49|Avg: $25
3528%
#1160
Core i5-430M
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $33
3523%
#1161
Core 2 Duo T6600
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $4
3428%
#1164
Celeron N3010
MSRP: $107|Avg: N/A
100%
#1165
Core i7-3537U
MSRP: $346|Avg: N/A
99%
#1166
Core M-5Y10c
MSRP: $281|Avg: $281
99%
#1167
Core M-5Y10a
MSRP: $281|Avg: $281
99%
#1168
Core M-5Y31
MSRP: $281|Avg: $30
99%
#1170
Celeron 1047UE
MSRP: $100|Avg: $100
98%
#1171
Core M-5Y70
MSRP: $281|Avg: $281
98%
#1172
Celeron U3400
MSRP: $86|Avg: $5
97%
#1173
Celeron T1600
MSRP: $107|Avg: $15
97%
#1174
Pro A12-8800B
MSRP: $400|Avg: $40
97%
#1176
Core i7-2637M
MSRP: $289|Avg: N/A
95%
#1177
Core 2 Duo SL9600
MSRP: $316|Avg: N/A
95%
#1178
Athlon PRO 3045B
MSRP: $426|Avg: $180
95%
#1179
Core 2 Duo T5600
MSRP: $241|Avg: N/A
94%
Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Per Dollar Celeron B730

#1063
Atom x5-Z8300
MSRP: $20|Avg: N/A
2874%
#1064
Atom Z3735G
MSRP: $17|Avg: N/A
2832%
#1065
Core i5-480M
MSRP: $81|Avg: $77
2599%
#1066
Core i5-460M
MSRP: $80|Avg: $129
2588%
#1067
Core i5-2540M
MSRP: $266|Avg: $10
2564%
#1069
Core i5-450M
MSRP: $32|Avg: $31
2476%
#1070
Core i3-380M
MSRP: $49|Avg: $25
2374%
#1071
Core i5-430M
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $33
2370%
#1072
Core 2 Duo T6600
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $4
2307%
#1075
Celeron B730
MSRP: $70|Avg: $10
100%
#1078
A9-9425
MSRP: $150|Avg: $30
99%
#1080
Core i5-4402E
MSRP: $266|Avg: $100
99%
#1081
A6-7000
MSRP: $100|Avg: $15
98%
#1083
Core i5-2520M
MSRP: $225|Avg: N/A
98%
#1084
Core i7-2710QE
MSRP: $378|Avg: $40
97%
#1089
Core i5-3610ME
MSRP: $276|Avg: $22
94%
#1090
Core m3-7Y32
MSRP: $281|Avg: $281
94%
Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Comparison

About PassMark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

Performance Leadership: The Celeron N3010 delivers superior performance across the board. It outperforms the Celeron B730 in both compute-intensive tasks (2.8% faster) and gaming workloads.
InsightCeleron N3010Celeron B730
Gaming
Superior gaming performance
Lower gaming performance
Workstation
Better multi-core power
Weaker in multi-core tasks
Price
⚠️ Higher cost ($107)
More affordable ($10)
Longevity
🛑 Legacy (Airmont (2016) / 14 nm)
🛑 Legacy (Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) / 32 nm)

💎 Value Proposition

Value Proposition: While both processors are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Celeron B730 holds the technical lead in efficiency. Priced at $10 (vs $107), it costs 91% less. While offering basic entry-level performance, it results in a 941% higher cost efficiency score compared to the Celeron N3010.
InsightCeleron N3010Celeron B730
Cost Efficiency
Lower cost efficiency
Better overall value (+941%)
Upfront Cost
⚠️ Higher cost ($107)
More affordable ($10)

Performance Check

Paired with RTX 4090

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 Celeron N3010 and Celeron B730

Intel

Celeron N3010

The Celeron N3010 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 10 January 2016 (9 years ago). It is based on the Airmont (2016) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.04 GHz, with boost up to 2.24 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1170. Thermal design power (TDP): 4 Watt. Memory support: DDR3L-1600. Passmark benchmark score: 735 points. Launch price was $107.

Intel

Celeron B730

The Celeron B730 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 July 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture. It features 1 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.8 GHz. L3 cache: 1.5 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: G2. Thermal design power (TDP): 256 kB + 1.5 MB. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 715 points. Launch price was $70.

Processing Power

The Celeron N3010 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Celeron B730 offers 1 cores / 2 threads — the Celeron N3010 has 1 more core. Boost clocks reach 2.24 GHz on the Celeron N3010 versus 1.8 GHz on the Celeron B730 — a 21.8% clock advantage for the Celeron N3010. The Celeron N3010 uses the Airmont (2016) architecture (14 nm), while the Celeron B730 uses Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron N3010 scores 735 against the Celeron B730's 715 — a 2.8% lead for the Celeron N3010. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Celeron N3010 vs 1.5 MB (total) on the Celeron B730.

FeatureCeleron N3010Celeron B730
Cores / Threads
2 / 2+100%
1 / 2
Boost Clock
2.24 GHz+24%
1.8 GHz
Base Clock
1.04 GHz
L3 Cache
0 kB
1.5 MB (total)
L2 Cache
1 MB+300%
256K (per core)
Process
14 nm-56%
32 nm
Architecture
Airmont (2016)
Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)
PassMark
735+3%
715
🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron N3010 uses the FCBGA1170 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Celeron B730 uses G2 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 1600 on the Celeron N3010 versus DDR3-1333 on the Celeron B730 — the Celeron N3010 supports 199.3% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron B730 supports up to 16 GB of RAM compared to 8 66.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 4 (Celeron N3010) vs 16 (Celeron B730) — the Celeron B730 offers 12 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Braswell (Celeron N3010) and HM65,HM67,QM67,QM77 (Celeron B730).

FeatureCeleron N3010Celeron B730
Socket
FCBGA1170
G2
PCIe Generation
PCIe 3.0+50%
PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed
1600+53233%
DDR3-1333
Max RAM Capacity
8
16 GB+209715100%
RAM Channels
2
2
ECC Support
PCIe Lanes
4
16+300%
🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization support: true (Celeron N3010) vs VT-x (Celeron B730). Both include integrated graphics Intel HD Graphics 400 (Celeron N3010) and HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) (Celeron B730) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron N3010 targets Budget Mobile, Celeron B730 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron B730 rivals Pentium 967.

FeatureCeleron N3010Celeron B730
Integrated GPU
Yes
Yes
IGPU Model
Intel HD Graphics 400
HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)
Unlocked
No
AVX-512
No
No
Virtualization
true
VT-x
Target Use
Budget Mobile
Budget
💰

Value Analysis

The Celeron N3010 launched at $107 MSRP, while the Celeron B730 debuted at $70.

FeatureCeleron N3010Celeron B730
MSRP
$107
$70-35%
Avg Price (30d)
$10
Release Date
2016
2012