Celeron N4120 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 N4120 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 N4120 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 N4120

2019

Why buy it

✅+0.1% higher PassMark.
✅+33.3% larger total L3 cache (4 MB vs 3 MB).
✅Draws 4W instead of 55W, a 51W reduction.

Trade-offs

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

Core i3-3250

2013

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (2,460 vs 2,463).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (3 MB vs 4 MB).
❌Launch MSRP is still $138 MSRP, while Celeron N4120 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌1275% higher power demand at 55W vs 4W.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron N4120 better than Core i3-3250?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Core i3-3250 is ahead with a 1.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Celeron N4120 pulls ahead with 0.1% better PassMark. Celeron N4120 also has the bigger cache pool with 33.3% larger total L3 cache (4 MB vs 3 MB).

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Celeron N4120 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.1% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 33.3% larger total L3 cache (4 MB vs 3 MB).

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

Celeron N4120 is still the much better call for a fresh build. Celeron N4120 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $138 MSRP, and it still gives you 0.1% better PassMark. Core i3-3250 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2013 platform. Even with 100.0% better value on paper (17.8 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on LGA1155.

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

Celeron N4120 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2019 vs 2013), 33.3% larger total L3 cache (4 MB vs 3 MB), 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 N4120 vs Core i3-3250 Technical Specifications

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

Celeron N4120

The Celeron N4120 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Gemini Lake Refresh (2019) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.1 GHz, with boost up to 2.6 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: 2,463 points. Launch price was $69.

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 N4120 packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Core i3-3250 offers 2 cores / 4 threads — the Celeron N4120 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.6 GHz on the Celeron N4120 versus 3.5 GHz on the Core i3-3250 — a 29.5% clock advantage for the Core i3-3250 (base: 1.1 GHz vs 3.5 GHz). The Celeron N4120 uses the Gemini Lake Refresh (2019) architecture (14 nm), while the Core i3-3250 uses Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron N4120 scores 2,463 against the Core i3-3250's 2,460 — a 0.1% lead for the Celeron N4120. L3 cache: 4 MB on the Celeron N4120 vs 3 MB (total) on the Core i3-3250.

Feature	Celeron N4120	Core i3-3250
Cores / Threads	4 / 4+100%	2 / 4
Boost Clock	2.6 GHz	3.5 GHz+35%
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	Gemini Lake Refresh (2019)	Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)
PassMark	2,463	2,460

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron N4120 uses the FCBGA1090 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core i3-3250 uses LGA1155 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.