Celeron N3160 vs Pentium A1018

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 N3160 vs Pentium A1018 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 N3160 vs Pentium A1018: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron N3160

2016

Why buy it

✅Draws 4W instead of 35W, a 31W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (4 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel HD Graphics 400, while Pentium A1018 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.

Pentium A1018

2013

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,188 vs 1,195).
❌Launch MSRP is still $132 MSRP, while Celeron N3160 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌775% higher power demand at 35W vs 4W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron N3160 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron N3160 better than Pentium A1018?

Yes. Celeron N3160 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 0.2% average FPS lead across 41 shared CPU game tests in our data, 0.6% better PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Celeron N3160 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 0.2% more average FPS across 41 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Celeron N3160 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.6% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads.

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

Celeron N3160 is still the much better call for a fresh build. Celeron N3160 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $132 MSRP, and it still gives you a 0.2% average FPS lead across 41 shared CPU game tests in our data. Pentium A1018 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2013 platform. Even with 100.0% better value on paper (9.0 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on PGA988.

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

Celeron N3160 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2016 vs 2013) and more multi-core headroom with 4 cores / 4 threads instead of 2/2. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Celeron N3160 vs Pentium A1018 Technical Specifications

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

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.

Pentium A1018

The Pentium A1018 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency: 2.1 GHz. L3 cache: 1 MB Intel® Smart Cache. Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: PGA988. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3/L/-RS 1333/1600. Passmark benchmark score: 1,188 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron N3160 packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Pentium A1018 offers 2 cores / 2 threads — the Celeron N3160 has 2 more cores. The Celeron N3160 is built on the Braswell (2015−2016) architecture. In PassMark, the Celeron N3160 scores 1,195 against the Pentium A1018's 1,188 — a 0.6% lead for the Celeron N3160. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Celeron N3160 vs 1 MB Intel® Smart Cache on the Pentium A1018.

Feature	Celeron N3160	Pentium A1018
Cores / Threads	4 / 4+100%	2 / 2
Boost Clock	2.24 GHz	—
Base Clock	1.6 GHz	2.1 GHz+31%
L3 Cache	0 kB	1 MB Intel® Smart Cache
L2 Cache	2 MB	—
Process	14 nm-36%	22 nm
Architecture	Braswell (2015−2016)	—
PassMark	1,195	1,188

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron N3160 uses the FCBGA1170 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Pentium A1018 uses PGA988 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Celeron N3160	Pentium A1018
Socket	FCBGA1170	PGA988
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	1600	—
Max RAM Capacity	8	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	4	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: true (Celeron N3160) / not specified (Pentium A1018). The Celeron N3160 includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics 400), while the Pentium A1018 requires a dedicated GPU. Direct competitor: Celeron N3160 rivals AMD E2-9010.