CPU Comparison

The Intel Celeron N5105 and Intel Core i3-4360T occupy very different positions in the processor landscape, despite their average benchmark scores landing within 1% of each other. The N5105, a 10 nm Tremont-based mobile chip with four cores, posts an average score of 955, while the 22 nm Haswell-based desktop i3-4360T with two cores and four threads averages 963. This near-identical overall performance, however, masks a clear generational split in how each processor achieves its results. The data shows a complete sweep for the Celeron N5105 across all five head-to-head benchmark comparisons, with margins consistently hovering around 21%. The Core i3-4360T’s higher base clock of 3.20 GHz and its position in the 26th percentile of all CPUs compared to the N5105’s 25th percentile suggest that raw clock speed alone does not dictate modern workload performance.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark results present a one-sided picture: the Intel Celeron N5105 wins every benchmark where both processors have recorded scores. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the N5105 scores 341 against the i3-4360T’s 282, a 20.9% advantage. This pattern repeats across Cinebench R20 multicore (1422 vs 1175), R20 singlecore (200 vs 165), R23 multicore (3388 vs 2799), and R23 singlecore (478 vs 395). Each of these wins falls between 20.9% and 21.2%, indicating a consistent performance gap rather than a workload-specific anomaly.

The i3-4360T’s only claim to a win is its overall average benchmark score of 963, which edges out the N5105’s 955 by 0.8%. This aggregate figure is pulled up by the i3-4360T’s performance in the Geekbench multicore test, where it holds a score of 1189 compared to the N5105’s 516 in that same test. However, this Geekbench result is not part of the head-to-head comparison table, which only includes Cinebench tests. In the available Cinebench data, the N5105 demonstrates superiority in both single-threaded and multi-threaded rendering tasks. The N5105’s 21% lead in single-core tests is particularly notable, as it suggests the Tremont architecture’s efficiency at lower clocks (2.00 GHz base, 2.90 GHz boost) outperforms the older Haswell design running at a fixed 3.20 GHz.

For users focused on sustained multi-threaded workloads, the N5105’s four physical cores provide an advantage over the i3-4360T’s two cores with Hyper-Threading. The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 3388 for the N5105 versus 2799 for the i3-4360T represents a 21% margin that would translate to faster renders in CPU-bound tasks. Conversely, the i3-4360T’s higher average benchmark score, driven by its Geekbench multicore result, suggests it may hold an edge in certain legacy or differently-optimized applications, though this is not reflected in any of the five shared Cinebench tests.

The Verdict

The data points decisively toward the Intel Celeron N5105 for any user prioritizing raw benchmark performance in modern rendering workloads. Across all five head-to-head Cinebench comparisons, the N5105 leads by margins between 20.9% and 21.2%. This is not a marginal victory; it is a systematic outperformance that covers both single-core and multi-core tests. The N5105’s 10 nm process node and Tremont architecture deliver higher efficiency, evidenced by its 10 W TDP compared to the i3-4360T’s 35 W, while still producing faster results in every shared benchmark.

The Intel Core i3-4360T, despite its higher base clock of 3.20 GHz and larger 1,400 million transistor count, cannot overcome the architectural advantages of the newer N5105. Its only statistical win is the average benchmark score of 963 versus 955, a difference of less than 1% that falls within the margin of error for many benchmark suites. The i3-4360T’s 26th percentile ranking versus the N5105’s 25th percentile reinforces this near-parity in overall standing. For a desktop user with an existing Socket 1150 platform, the i3-4360T may be a reasonable drop-in upgrade, but the benchmark data offers no scenario where it outperforms the N5105 in the tests conducted. The N5105 is the clear choice for new builds, especially those prioritizing low power consumption without sacrificing Cinebench performance.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest single margin in the head-to-head results is in Cinebench R20 singlecore, where the N5105 scores 200 against the i3-4360T’s 165, a 21.2% delta. This is a significant finding because it directly contradicts the expectation that a higher base clock (3.20 GHz vs 2.00 GHz) would yield a single-thread advantage. The N5105’s boost clock of 2.90 GHz, while still lower than the i3-4360T’s fixed 3.20 GHz, produces faster single-threaded rendering, indicating that instructions per clock (IPC) improvements in Tremont outweigh the clock speed deficit.

In Cinebench R23 multicore, the N5105 achieves 3388, which is 589 points higher than the i3-4360T’s 2799. This 21% difference translates to substantial time savings in multi-threaded renders. The N5105’s four physical cores versus the i3-4360T’s two cores with four threads explains part of this gap, but the single-core advantage shows the architectural efficiency is not solely dependent on core count. The R15 multicore test shows the same pattern: 341 for the N5105 versus 282 for the i3-4360T, a 59-point lead.

The R20 multicore result (1422 vs 1175) and R23 singlecore result (478 vs 395) complete the sweep with 21% and 21% deltas, respectively. Across all five tests, the N5105’s smallest margin is 20.9% in R15 multicore, and its largest is 21.2% in R20 singlecore. This consistency suggests a uniform performance advantage that scales across different Cinebench versions, from the older R15 to the newer R23. The i3-4360T’s best relative showing is still a 20.9% deficit, meaning there is no benchmark in this set where it comes close to matching the N5105.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i3-4360T has a slightly higher average benchmark score of 963, compared to the Intel Celeron N5105’s 955, a difference of 0.8%.

Q: How many benchmark wins does each processor have in the head-to-head comparison?

A: The Intel Celeron N5105 wins all 5 head-to-head benchmarks, while the Intel Core i3-4360T has 0 wins.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two processors?

A: The largest gap is in Cinebench R20 singlecore, where the Intel Celeron N5105 leads by 21.2%, scoring 200 versus the Intel Core i3-4360T’s 165.

Q: Does the Core i3-4360T’s higher base clock help it win any benchmarks?

A: No. Despite a base clock of 3.20 GHz compared to the N5105’s 2.00 GHz, the i3-4360T loses all five Cinebench tests, including single-core tests where clock speed typically matters most.

Q: How do the two processors compare in Cinebench R23 multicore?

A: The Intel Celeron N5105 scores 3388, which is 21% higher than the Intel Core i3-4360T’s 2799.

Q: What are the percentile rankings for each processor?

A: The Intel Core i3-4360T ranks in the 26th percentile of all CPUs, while the Intel Celeron N5105 ranks in the 25th percentile.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent fundamentally different design philosophies and eras. The Intel Celeron N5105 uses the Tremont architecture on a 10 nm process node, built by Intel with a die size of 63.8 mm². It has 4 cores and 4 threads, with a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 2.90 GHz. Its cache hierarchy includes 64 KB of L1 per core, 1.5 MB of shared L2, and 4 MB of shared L3. The N5105 supports DDR4 and LPDDR4 memory in dual-channel configuration, with a memory bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s. It is a mobile segment processor with a 10 W TDP, socketed in Intel BGA 1338, and is marked as end-of-life.

The Intel Core i3-4360T, in contrast, uses the Haswell architecture on a 22 nm process node, also built by Intel, with a substantially larger die size of 177 mm² and 1,400 million transistors. It has 2 cores and 4 threads, with a base clock of 3.20 GHz and no boost clock. Its cache includes 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 4 MB of shared L3. Memory support is limited to DDR3 in dual-channel configuration, with no specified memory bandwidth. It is a desktop segment processor with a 35 W TDP, socketed in Intel Socket 1150, and remains in active production. The i3-4360T was released in July 2014, while the N5105 has no release date listed.

The integrated graphics differ as well: the N5105 features UHD Graphics 24EU, while the i3-4360T features Intel HD 4600. PCIe support also varies, with the N5105 offering Gen 3 with 8 lanes (CPU only), while the i3-4360T offers Gen 3 without a specific lane count. Neither processor supports ECC memory, and both have locked multipliers. The production status differs significantly, with the N5105 listed as end-of-life and the i3-4360T as active.

Specification Differences

The specification tables reveal several key differences between the two processors. Core and thread counts differ: the Intel Celeron N5105 has 4 cores and 4 threads, while the Intel Core i3-4360T has 2 cores and 4 threads. Base clocks are 2.00 GHz for the N5105 and 3.20 GHz for the i3-4360T, with only the N5105 offering a boost clock at 2.90 GHz. Thermal design power shows a major divergence: the N5105 draws 10 W, while the i3-4360T draws 35 W.

Process node and die size are also distinct: the N5105 uses 10 nm with a 63.8 mm² die, while the i3-4360T uses 22 nm with a 177 mm² die and 1,400 million transistors. The N5105 has no listed transistor count. Cache configurations differ in L2: the N5105 has 1.5 MB shared, while the i3-4360T has 256 KB per core. L1 and L3 are identical at 64 KB per core and 4 MB shared, respectively. Memory support separates the two: the N5105 supports DDR4 and LPDDR4, while the i3-4360T supports only DDR3. Memory bandwidth is listed only for the N5105 at 46.9 GB/s.

Socket and market segment differ: the N5105 uses Intel BGA 1338 and targets mobile, while the i3-4360T uses Intel Socket 1150 and targets desktop. The production status is end-of-life for the N5105 and active for the i3-4360T. The i3-4360T has a release date of July 2014, while the N5105 has none listed. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier, and both have integrated graphics, though with different models. The N5105 has a part number of SRKGV, while the i3-4360T has no listed part number.