Celeron N5105 vs Core i3-7130U

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 N5105 vs Core i3-7130U 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 N5105 vs Core i3-7130U: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron N5105

2021

Why buy it

✅+33.3% larger total L3 cache (4 MB vs 3 MB).
✅Draws 10W instead of 15W, a 5W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (4,003 vs 4,055).
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i3-7130U can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Core i3-7130U

2017

Why buy it

✅+1.3% higher PassMark.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (12 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics 620, while Celeron N5105 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (3 MB vs 4 MB).
❌50% higher power demand at 15W vs 10W.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron N5105 better than Core i3-7130U?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Celeron N5105 is ahead with a 0.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Core i3-7130U pulls ahead with 1.3% better PassMark. Celeron N5105 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, Core i3-7130U is the stronger fit. You are getting 1.3% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 4 threads.

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

Celeron N5105 still makes the most sense overall. Celeron N5105 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 0.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

Celeron N5105 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2021 vs 2017) and 33.3% larger total L3 cache (4 MB vs 3 MB). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Celeron N5105 vs Core i3-7130U Technical Specifications

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

Celeron N5105

The Celeron N5105 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Jasper Lake (2021) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2 GHz, with boost up to 2.9 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB (total). L2 cache: 1.5 MB (total). Built on 10 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1338. Thermal design power (TDP): 10 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 4,003 points. Launch price was $69.

Core i3-7130U

The Core i3-7130U is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 12 June 2017 (8 years ago). It is based on the Kaby Lake-U (2017) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.7 GHz, with boost up to 2.7 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1356. Thermal design power (TDP): 15 Watt. Memory support: DDR3, DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 4,055 points. Launch price was $281.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron N5105 packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Core i3-7130U offers 2 cores / 4 threads — the Celeron N5105 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.9 GHz on the Celeron N5105 versus 2.7 GHz on the Core i3-7130U — a 7.1% clock advantage for the Celeron N5105 (base: 2 GHz vs 2.7 GHz). The Celeron N5105 uses the Jasper Lake (2021) architecture (10 nm), while the Core i3-7130U uses Kaby Lake-U (2017) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron N5105 scores 4,003 against the Core i3-7130U's 4,055 — a 1.3% lead for the Core i3-7130U. L3 cache: 4 MB (total) on the Celeron N5105 vs 3 MB on the Core i3-7130U.

Feature	Celeron N5105	Core i3-7130U
Cores / Threads	4 / 4+100%	2 / 4
Boost Clock	2.9 GHz+7%	2.7 GHz
Base Clock	2 GHz	2.7 GHz+35%
L3 Cache	4 MB (total)+33%	3 MB
L2 Cache	1.5 MB (total)+200%	512 kB
Process	10 nm-29%	14 nm
Architecture	Jasper Lake (2021)	Kaby Lake-U (2017)
PassMark	4,003	4,055+1%
Geekbench 6 Single	—	900

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron N5105 uses the BGA1338 socket (PCIe 4.0), while the Core i3-7130U uses BGA1356 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Celeron N5105	Core i3-7130U
Socket	BGA1338	BGA1356
PCIe Generation	PCIe 4.0+33%	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	—	DDR4-2133
Max RAM Capacity	—	32 GB
RAM Channels	—	2
ECC Support	—	No
PCIe Lanes	—	12

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: not specified (Celeron N5105) / VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Core i3-7130U). The Core i3-7130U includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics 620), while the Celeron N5105 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i3-7130U targets Mainstream Laptop. Direct competitor: Core i3-7130U rivals Ryzen 3 3250U.