Celeron N3450 vs Core M-5Y71

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 N3450 vs Core M-5Y71 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 N3450 vs Core M-5Y71: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron N3450

2016

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +5.6% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 6W instead of 512W, a 506W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (6 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel HD Graphics 500, while Core M-5Y71 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

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

Core M-5Y71

2014

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Celeron N3450 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (1,975 vs 1,981).
❌Launch MSRP is still $281 MSRP, while Celeron N3450 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌8433.3% higher power demand at 512W vs 6W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron N3450 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron N3450 better than Core M-5Y71?

Yes. Celeron N3450 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 5.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 0.3% 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 N3450 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 5.6% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Celeron N3450 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.3% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads.

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

Celeron N3450 is the easy recommendation for a fresh desktop build. Celeron N3450 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $281 MSRP, and it still gives you a 5.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core M-5Y71 only looks good on raw value math because it is a cheap legacy laptop chip, not because it is a real desktop gaming recommendation. It simply does not keep up in modern games, especially when the gap is already 5.6% in the shared gaming data.

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 2014) and more multi-core headroom with 4 cores / 4 threads instead of 2/4. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Celeron N3450 vs Core M-5Y71 Technical Specifications

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

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.

Core M-5Y71

The Core M-5Y71 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 27 October 2014 (11 years ago). It is based on the Broadwell-Y (2014) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.2 GHz, with boost up to 2.9 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1234. Thermal design power (TDP): 4.5 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,975 points. Launch price was $281.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron N3450 packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Core M-5Y71 offers 2 cores / 4 threads — the Celeron N3450 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.2 GHz on the Celeron N3450 versus 2.9 GHz on the Core M-5Y71 — a 27.5% clock advantage for the Core M-5Y71 (base: 1.1 GHz vs 1.2 GHz). The Celeron N3450 uses the Apollo Lake (2014−2016) architecture (14 nm), while the Core M-5Y71 uses Broadwell-Y (2014) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron N3450 scores 1,981 against the Core M-5Y71's 1,975 — a 0.3% lead for the Celeron N3450. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Celeron N3450 vs 4 MB (total) on the Core M-5Y71.

Feature	Celeron N3450	Core M-5Y71
Cores / Threads	4 / 4+100%	2 / 4
Boost Clock	2.2 GHz	2.9 GHz+32%
Base Clock	1.1 GHz	1.2 GHz+9%
L3 Cache	0 kB	4 MB (total)
L2 Cache	2 MB	256K (per core)+12700%
Process	14 nm	14 nm
Architecture	Apollo Lake (2014−2016)	Broadwell-Y (2014)
PassMark	1,981	1,975

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron N3450 uses the FCBGA1296 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core M-5Y71 uses FCBGA1234 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Celeron N3450	Core M-5Y71
Socket	FCBGA1296	FCBGA1234
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	2400	—
Max RAM Capacity	8	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	6	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: true (Celeron N3450) / not specified (Core M-5Y71). The Celeron N3450 includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics 500), while the Core M-5Y71 requires a dedicated GPU. Direct competitor: Celeron N3450 rivals AMD A4-9120.