Celeron N4100 vs Core i3-3250

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 N4100 vs Core i3-3250 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 N4100 vs Core i3-3250: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron N4100

2017

Why buy it

✅+33.3% larger total L3 cache (4 MB vs 3 MB).
✅Draws 6W instead of 55W, a 49W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (2,453 vs 2,460).

Core i3-3250

2013

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (3 MB vs 4 MB).
❌Launch MSRP is still $138 MSRP, while Celeron N4100 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌816.7% higher power demand at 55W vs 6W.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i3-3250 better than Celeron N4100?

Yes. Core i3-3250 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 2.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 0.3% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Core i3-3250 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 2.2% 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, Core i3-3250 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.3% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 4 threads.

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

Core i3-3250 is the better buy right now. Core i3-3250 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $138 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 2.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (17.8 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Celeron N4100 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2017 vs 2013) and 33.3% larger total L3 cache (4 MB vs 3 MB). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Celeron N4100 vs Core i3-3250 Technical Specifications

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

Celeron N4100

The Celeron N4100 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 11 December 2017 (7 years ago). It is based on the Goldmont Plus (2017) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.1 GHz, with boost up to 2.4 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB. L2 cache: 4 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1090. Thermal design power (TDP): 6 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 2,453 points. Launch price was $107.

Core i3-3250

The Core i3-3250 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 9 June 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3.5 GHz, with boost up to 3.5 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1155. Thermal design power (TDP): 55 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-1333, DDR3-1600. Passmark benchmark score: 2,460 points. Launch price was $138.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron N4100 packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Core i3-3250 offers 2 cores / 4 threads — the Celeron N4100 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.4 GHz on the Celeron N4100 versus 3.5 GHz on the Core i3-3250 — a 37.3% clock advantage for the Core i3-3250 (base: 1.1 GHz vs 3.5 GHz). The Celeron N4100 uses the Goldmont Plus (2017) architecture (14 nm), while the Core i3-3250 uses Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron N4100 scores 2,453 against the Core i3-3250's 2,460 — a 0.3% lead for the Core i3-3250. L3 cache: 4 MB on the Celeron N4100 vs 3 MB (total) on the Core i3-3250.

Feature	Celeron N4100	Core i3-3250
Cores / Threads	4 / 4+100%	2 / 4
Boost Clock	2.4 GHz	3.5 GHz+46%
Base Clock	1.1 GHz	3.5 GHz+218%
L3 Cache	4 MB+33%	3 MB (total)
L2 Cache	4 MB+1500%	256 kB (per core)
Process	14 nm-36%	22 nm
Architecture	Goldmont Plus (2017)	Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)
PassMark	2,453	2,460

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron N4100 uses the FCBGA1090 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core i3-3250 uses LGA1155 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.