CPU
GPU
Celeron N3160
Celeron M U3400
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 Celeron M U3400 is on rank 998, 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 Celeron M U3400
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Celeron N3160 | Celeron M U3400 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ✅ Superior gaming performance | ❌ Lower gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | ✅ More affordable ($0) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($5) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Braswell (2015−2016) / 14 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Arrandale (2010−2011) / 32 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Celeron N3160 | Celeron M U3400 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅ More affordable ($0) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($5) |
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 Celeron M U3400
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.
Celeron M U3400
The Celeron M U3400 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Arrandale (2010−2011) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.06 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1288. Thermal design power (TDP): 512 kB + 2 MB. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,205 points. Launch price was $69.
Processing Power
The Celeron N3160 packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Celeron M U3400 offers 2 cores / 2 threads — the Celeron N3160 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.24 GHz on the Celeron N3160 versus 1.06 GHz on the Celeron M U3400 — a 71.5% clock advantage for the Celeron N3160. The Celeron N3160 uses the Braswell (2015−2016) architecture (14 nm), while the Celeron M U3400 uses Arrandale (2010−2011) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron N3160 scores 1,195 against the Celeron M U3400's 1,205 — a 0.8% lead for the Celeron M U3400. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Celeron N3160 vs 2 MB on the Celeron M U3400.
| Feature | Celeron N3160 | Celeron M U3400 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 4 / 4+100% | 2 / 2 |
| Boost Clock | 2.24 GHz+111% | 1.06 GHz |
| Base Clock | 1.6 GHz | — |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 2 MB |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+300% | 512 kB |
| Process | 14 nm-56% | 32 nm |
| Architecture | Braswell (2015−2016) | Arrandale (2010−2011) |
| PassMark | 1,195 | 1,205 |
Memory & Platform
The Celeron N3160 uses the FCBGA1170 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Celeron M U3400 uses BGA1288 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | Celeron N3160 | Celeron M U3400 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | FCBGA1170 | BGA1288 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0+50% | PCIe 2.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | 1600 | — |
| Max RAM Capacity | 8 | — |
| RAM Channels | 2 | — |
| ECC Support | ❌ | — |
| PCIe Lanes | 4 | — |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: true (Celeron N3160) / not specified (Celeron M U3400). The Celeron N3160 includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics 400), while the Celeron M U3400 requires a dedicated GPU. Direct competitor: Celeron N3160 rivals AMD E2-9010.
| Feature | Celeron N3160 | Celeron M U3400 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | — |
| IGPU Model | 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 Celeron N3160 and Celeron M U3400
