CPU
GPU
Celeron N3160
Atom Z3770
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 N3160 is positioned at rank 697 and the Atom Z3770 is on rank 702, 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 Celeron N3160
Performance Per Dollar Atom Z3770
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Celeron N3160 | Atom Z3770 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ❌ Lower gaming performance | ✅ Superior gaming performance |
| Workstation | ✅ Better multi-core power | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks |
| Price | Equivalent pricing | Equivalent pricing |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Braswell (2015−2016) / 14 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Bay Trail-T (2013−2014) / 22 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Celeron N3160 | Atom Z3770 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 Celeron N3160 and Atom Z3770
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.
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.
Processing Power
Both the Celeron N3160 and Atom Z3770 share an identical 4-core/4-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.24 GHz on the Celeron N3160 versus 2.39 GHz on the Atom Z3770 — a 6.5% clock advantage for the Atom Z3770 (base: 1.6 GHz vs 1.46 GHz). The Celeron N3160 uses the Braswell (2015−2016) architecture (14 nm), while the Atom Z3770 uses Bay Trail-T (2013−2014) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron N3160 scores 1,195 against the Atom Z3770's 1,189 — a 0.5% lead for the Celeron N3160. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.
| Feature | Celeron N3160 | Atom Z3770 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 4 / 4 | 4 / 4 |
| Boost Clock | 2.24 GHz | 2.39 GHz+7% |
| Base Clock | 1.6 GHz+10% | 1.46 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+300% | 512K (per core) |
| Process | 14 nm-36% | 22 nm |
| Architecture | Braswell (2015−2016) | Bay Trail-T (2013−2014) |
| PassMark | 1,195 | 1,189 |
Memory & Platform
The Celeron N3160 uses the FCBGA1170 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Atom Z3770 uses UTFCBGA1380 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 1600 on the Celeron N3160 versus LPDDR3-1066 on the Atom Z3770 — 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: 4 (Celeron N3160) vs 0 (Atom Z3770) — the Celeron N3160 offers 4 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: FCBGA1170 (Celeron N3160) and Intel FC-UTBGA592 (Atom Z3770).
| Feature | Celeron N3160 | Atom Z3770 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | FCBGA1170 | UTFCBGA1380 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0+50% | PCIe 2.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | 1600+53233% | LPDDR3-1066 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 8 | 4 GB+52428700% |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 4 | 0 |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: true (Celeron N3160) / not specified (Atom Z3770). Both include integrated graphics — Intel HD Graphics 400 (Celeron N3160) and Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail) (Atom Z3770) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Direct competitor: Celeron N3160 rivals AMD E2-9010.
| Feature | Celeron N3160 | Atom Z3770 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | Yes |
| IGPU Model | Intel HD Graphics 400 | Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail) |
| 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 Celeron N3160 and Atom Z3770
