Intel Celeron N5100 vs Intel Core i3-4150T Comparison

Intel Core i3-4150T and Intel Celeron N5100 occupy very different corners of the Intel lineup, yet their benchmark scores land them within a single percentage point of each other in the database’s aggregate ranking. The i3-4150T is a 2014 desktop part built on 22 nm Haswell silicon, while the N5100 is a 10 nm Jasper Lake mobile chip aimed at low-power systems. Despite the generational gap and the N5100’s higher core count, the recorded benchmarks show a consistent, narrow edge for the Celeron across every tested workload. This outcome invites a closer look at what each processor actually delivers, not just on paper, but in the numbers that matter for everyday use.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are unambiguous: the Celeron N5100 wins all five recorded comparisons. The margins are tight, but they are uniform across both single-core and multi-core tests. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the N5100 scores 282 against the i3-4150T’s 244, a 13.5% advantage. The same pattern appears in Cinebench R20 multi-core, where the N5100 posts 1179 versus 1018, a 13.7% lead. Single-core performance follows suit: R20 single-core shows the N5100 at 166 and the i3-4150T at 143, a 13.9% gap, while R23 single-core gives the N5100 396 and the i3-4150T 342, a 13.6% edge. The largest absolute margin is in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the N5100 reaches 2809 and the i3-4150T stops at 2425, again a 13.7% difference.

What makes these results surprising is the hardware behind them. The i3-4150T runs at a base clock of 2.90 GHz with two cores and four threads, while the N5100 has four physical cores but a base clock of just 1100.00 MHz, boosting up to 2.80 GHz. The N5100’s higher core count compensates for its low base frequency, and its Tremont architecture appears more efficient per clock in these tests. The i3-4150T does have a slight advantage in the aggregate benchmark score, with 975 versus 966 for the N5100, but that is driven by the Geekbench results, which are only recorded for the i3-4150T. The N5100 has no Geekbench entry in the database, so the overall average is not directly comparable across the same test suite.

The percentile placement reinforces how close these parts are. Both sit at the 26th percentile among all CPUs in the database, meaning they perform similarly relative to the broader market. The i3-4150T’s nearest rivals include the AMD Athlon X4 840, the Intel Core i3-4130, and the AMD A10-7870K, each with an average score of 975 and a delta of 0%. The N5100’s nearest rivals are slightly different: the Intel Xeon X5570 scores 967 (a 0.1% deficit), the AMD Ryzen 7 3700U scores 968 (0.2% behind), the Intel Core i5-2400S also scores 968 (0.2% behind), and the Intel Pentium Gold G5500T scores 963 (0.3% ahead of the N5100). These rivalries show that both chips are trading blows with older quad-core and low-power mobile parts, but neither pulls away from the pack.

Looking at the raw numbers, the N5100’s win is not a fluke. It is faster in every recorded Cinebench test, and the deltas are consistent, ranging from 13.5% to 13.9%. That consistency suggests a genuine architectural advantage rather than a workload-specific quirk. The i3-4150T’s Haswell cores are older, and despite a higher base clock, they cannot overcome the N5100’s newer design and extra cores. The data does not support a scenario where the i3-4150T wins; the only recorded benchmark where it appears ahead is Geekbench, but the N5100 has no Geekbench score to compare against.

The Verdict

From the recorded data alone, the Intel Celeron N5100 is the faster processor in every benchmark that directly compares the two. It wins Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 in both multi-core and single-core tests, with margins between 13.5% and 13.9%. If the decision rests purely on measured performance, the N5100 is the clear choice. The i3-4150T’s only claim to superiority comes from its aggregate average score, which includes Geekbench results that have no N5100 counterpart, so that figure cannot be used to argue for the i3-4150T in a head-to-head context.

That said, the context matters. The i3-4150T is a desktop chip with a 35 W TDP, while the N5100 is a mobile part with a 6 W TDP. The N5100 delivers better performance while consuming far less power, which is a significant advantage for systems where thermal limits or battery life are primary concerns. The i3-4150T requires an Intel Socket 1150 motherboard, while the N5100 uses Intel BGA 1338, meaning they are not interchangeable in any system. The i3-4150T supports DDR3 memory, whereas the N5100 supports DDR4 and LPDDR4, so platform-level choices will likely dictate which chip is even viable.

For a user building a desktop with existing DDR3 memory and a Socket 1150 board, the i3-4150T remains a functional option, but the benchmarks show it is slower than the N5100 in compute-heavy tasks. For anyone starting fresh with a low-power or mobile design, the N5100 is the stronger performer on paper and in the recorded tests. The verdict is straightforward: the N5100 wins on performance, and the i3-4150T wins only on platform familiarity, not on any measured speed advantage.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different eras and different design philosophies. The i3-4150T uses the Haswell architecture, built on Intel’s 22 nm process node. It has two cores and four threads, with a base clock of 2.90 GHz and no boost clock recorded. The die size is 177 mm², and the transistor count is 1,400 million. Cache is organized as 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 3 MB of shared L3. Memory support is limited to DDR3, running on a dual-channel bus. The integrated graphics are Intel HD 4400, and the PCIe interface is Gen 3. The TDP is 35 W, and the socket is Intel Socket 1150. It was released on April 30, 2014, and the multiplier is locked.

The Celeron N5100 is a Tremont architecture part, manufactured on Intel’s 10 nm process. It has four cores and four threads, with a base clock of 1100.00 MHz and a boost clock of 2.80 GHz. The die size is much smaller at 63.8 mm², and no transistor count is recorded. Cache differs notably: 64 KB L1 per core, but a shared 1.5 MB L2 and a shared 4 MB L3. Memory support includes both DDR4 and LPDDR4, also on a dual-channel bus, with a recorded memory bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s. The integrated graphics are UHD Graphics 24EU, and the PCIe interface is Gen 3 with 8 lanes available to the CPU. The TDP is just 6 W, and the socket is Intel BGA 1338. Production status is listed as end-of-life, and the part number is SRKGZ.

The architectural gap is stark. The N5100 uses a newer process node, which explains its lower power draw and smaller die. It also has four cores versus two, which helps in multi-threaded workloads. The i3-4150T’s Hyper-Threading gives it four threads from two cores, but that does not match the N5100’s four physical cores in the recorded tests. The N5100 also has more L3 cache (4 MB versus 3 MB) and a shared L2 that is larger than the i3-4150T’s per-core L2. The i3-4150T’s higher base clock does not overcome these structural differences. Neither chip supports ECC memory, and both have locked multipliers, so overclocking is not a differentiator.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in single-core tasks?

A: The Celeron N5100 wins in both recorded single-core tests. In Cinebench R20 single-core, it scores 166 against the i3-4150T’s 143, a 13.9% advantage. In R23 single-core, it scores 396 versus 342, a 13.6% edge.

Q: Does the i3-4150T have any benchmark where it beats the N5100?

A: No. In the head-to-head comparisons, the N5100 wins all five tests. The i3-4150T’s average benchmark score is higher (975 versus 966), but that figure includes Geekbench results that the N5100 does not have, so it is not a direct comparison.

Q: How do their power requirements differ?

A: The i3-4150T has a TDP of 35 W, while the N5100 has a TDP of 6 W. The N5100 uses significantly less power, which is relevant for compact or battery-powered systems.

Q: Can these two processors be used in the same motherboard?

A: No. The i3-4150T uses Intel Socket 1150, while the N5100 uses Intel BGA 1338. They are physically incompatible and require different platforms.

Q: What memory types do they support?

A: The i3-4150T supports only DDR3, while the N5100 supports DDR4 and LPDDR4. Both use dual-channel memory buses, but the N5100 has a recorded memory bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s, which the i3-4150T does not list.

Q: Are both processors unlocked for overclocking?

A: No. Both have locked multipliers, so neither can be overclocked in the conventional sense.

Where Each One Wins

The N5100 wins every recorded benchmark, so its advantages are clear. In multi-core workloads such as Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, the N5100 leads by roughly 13.5% to 13.7%. That makes it the better choice for rendering, video encoding, or any task that scales with core count. Its four physical cores outperform the i3-4150T’s two cores with Hyper-Threading in these tests. Single-core performance also favors the N5100, with margins around 13.6% to 13.9%, meaning even lightly threaded applications like web browsing or office work should feel slightly faster on the N5100, according to the data.

The i3-4150T does not win any recorded benchmark against the N5100, but it still has a niche in the database’s aggregate scores. Its average benchmark score of 975 is higher than the N5100’s 966, and it has Geekbench results (1762 multi-core, 892 single-core) that the N5100 lacks. If a workload relies on Geekbench-style measurements, the i3-4150T has recorded data to reference, but there is no N5100 score to compare against. The i3-4150T also supports DDR3 memory, which may be relevant for users with existing DDR3 modules, and it uses a desktop socket that allows for easier upgrades or repairs compared to the N5100’s BGA package.

For power-sensitive designs, the N5100 is the obvious pick given its 6 W TDP versus 35 W. For a traditional desktop with a Socket 1150 board and DDR3 memory, the i3-4150T is the only option of the two, but the benchmarks suggest it will be slower in compute tasks.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every major specification. The i3-4150T has 2 cores and 4 threads, while the N5100 has 4 cores and 4 threads. Base clocks are 2.90 GHz for the i3-4150T and 1100.00 MHz for the N5100, but the N5100 adds a boost clock of 2.80 GHz, which the i3-4150T lacks. The TDP is 35 W versus 6 W, a fivefold difference. The i3-4150T uses Intel Socket 1150, the N5100 uses Intel BGA 1338. Architecture is Haswell versus Tremont, with process nodes of 22 nm versus 10 nm. Die size is 177 mm² versus 63.8 mm², and transistor count is 1,400 million for the i3-4150T, with no data for the N5100.

Cache structures differ: the i3-4150T has 256 KB L2 per core and 3 MB shared L3, while the N5100 has 1.5 MB shared L2 and 4 MB shared L3, both with 64 KB L1 per core. Memory support is DDR3 for the i3-4150T versus DDR4 and LPDDR4 for the N5100, with the N5100 listing a memory bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s. Integrated graphics are Intel HD 4400 for the i3-4150T and UHD Graphics 24EU for the N5100. The PCIe interface is Gen 3 for both, but the N5100 specifies 8 lanes for the CPU. The i3-4150T was released on April 30, 2014, while the N5100 has no recorded release date but is marked as end-of-life. The N5100 has a part number (SRKGZ), while the i3-4150T does not. Neither chip supports ECC memory, and both have locked multipliers. The i3-4150T is a desktop segment part, while the N5100 is a mobile segment part.