Intel Celeron N5105 vs Intel Core i3-4360T Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits cleanly along workload type. The Intel Celeron N5105 wins every recorded head-to-head comparison, taking all five Cinebench tests. The Intel Core i3-4360T does not record a single win in the shared test suite. This makes the use-case split straightforward: for any multi-threaded rendering workload, the Celeron N5105 is the faster part, and it also holds the advantage in single-threaded Cinebench runs.

Looking at the broader database context, both processors sit near the same performance percentile. The Core i3-4360T records a percentile of 26 against all CPUs, while the Celeron N5105 sits at 25. Their average benchmark scores are close as well: 963 for the i3-4360T and 955 for the N5105. The nearest rivals for the i3-4360T include the Intel Pentium Gold G5500T with an identical average score of 963, and the AMD A8-9600 at 962, a 0.1% difference. The Celeron N5105 sits alongside the Intel Xeon W3570 at 955, the Xeon W3550 at 956, and the AMD Athlon X4 870K at 956.

The N5105 is best suited for compact, low-power systems where sustained multi-threaded throughput matters. The Core i3-4360T, despite losing every direct comparison, remains competitive in aggregate terms because its average score nearly matches the N5105. The database shows the N5105 delivering higher peak scores in each individual test, while the i3-4360T holds its ground in overall average performance due to consistent results across its recorded benchmark set.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel design eras. The Core i3-4360T uses the Haswell architecture on a 22 nm process node, with a die size of 177 mm² and 1,400 million transistors. The Celeron N5105 uses the Tremont architecture, codenamed Jasper Lake, on a 10 nm node with a much smaller die size of 63.8 mm². The i3-4360T ships in a 35 W TDP package on Intel Socket 1150, while the N5105 draws only 10 W and uses Intel BGA 1338, a soldered mobile socket.

Core counts differ despite similar thread counts. The i3-4360T has 2 cores and 4 threads, using Hyper-Threading to reach four logical processors. The N5105 has 4 physical cores and 4 threads, with no Hyper-Threading. Cache layouts also differ. The i3-4360T has 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 4 MB of shared L3. The N5105 has 64 KB of L1 per core, 1.5 MB of shared L2, and 4 MB of shared L3. The shared L2 on the N5105 is a notable structural difference, as it allows all four cores to access a unified pool of secondary cache.

Memory support diverges as well. The i3-4360T supports DDR3 in dual-channel configuration. The N5105 supports DDR4 and LPDDR4, also dual-channel, with a recorded memory bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s. Both use PCIe Gen 3, though the N5105 specifies 8 lanes on the CPU only. Integrated graphics differ: the i3-4360T has Intel HD 4600, while the N5105 has UHD Graphics 24EU. Neither processor supports ECC memory, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Celeron N5105 wins all five shared Cinebench tests, with margins between 17.3% and 17.5%. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the N5105 scores 341 against 282 for the i3-4360T, a 17.3% deficit for the older part. Cinebench R20 multi-core shows 1422 for the N5105 versus 1175 for the i3-4360T, a 17.4% gap. The R20 single-core test has the N5105 at 200 versus 165, again a 17.5% difference. Cinebench R23 multi-core records 3388 for the N5105 and 2799 for the i3-4360T, while R23 single-core shows 478 versus 395. Each of these results represents a consistent performance advantage of roughly 17% for the N5105, regardless of workload type or Cinebench version.

The consistency of the delta across all five tests is striking. Whether the workload is single-threaded or multi-threaded, the N5105 maintains nearly the same relative lead. This suggests the architectural efficiency of Tremont, combined with the higher boost clock of 2.90 GHz, provides a uniform advantage over the Haswell part running at a fixed 3.20 GHz with no boost capability. The i3-4360T has a higher base clock, but the N5105's boost clock and newer core design more than compensate.

In the broader database, the N5105's nearest rival, the Intel Xeon W3570, matches its average score of 955 exactly. The i3-4360T's nearest rival, the Pentium Gold G5500T, matches its 963 average. These rival relationships confirm that despite the N5105 winning every head-to-head test, the two processors occupy a similar overall performance class. The i3-4360T's higher average score comes from having fewer recorded tests, which may skew the aggregate slightly.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every hardware category. Core count: 2 for the i3-4360T, 4 for the N5105. Thread count: 4 for both. Base clock: 3.20 GHz for the i3-4360T, 2000.00 MHz for the N5105. Boost clock: not applicable for the i3-4360T, 2.90 GHz for the N5105. TDP: 35 W versus 10 W. Socket: Intel Socket 1150 versus Intel BGA 1338. Architecture: Haswell versus Tremont. Codename: Haswell versus Jasper Lake. Process node: 22 nm versus 10 nm. Die size: 177 mm² versus 63.8 mm². Transistor count: 1,400 million for the i3-4360T, not recorded for the N5105.

Cache structure: the i3-4360T has 256 KB L2 per core, the N5105 has 1.5 MB shared L2. Both have 4 MB shared L3. Memory support: DDR3 versus DDR4 and LPDDR4. Memory bandwidth: not recorded for the i3-4360T, 46.9 GB/s for the N5105. Integrated graphics: Intel HD 4600 versus UHD Graphics 24EU. Market segment: Desktop versus Mobile. Production status: Active versus End-of-life. Release date: 2014-07-20 for the i3-4360T, not recorded for the N5105. Part number: not recorded for the i3-4360T, SRKGV for the N5105.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-threaded workloads?

A: The Intel Celeron N5105 wins every multi-threaded Cinebench test. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 3388 against 2799 for the Core i3-4360T, a 17.4% advantage.

Q: Does the Core i3-4360T have any performance advantage?

A: The recorded head-to-head data shows no wins for the Core i3-4360T. It loses all five shared Cinebench tests. Its average benchmark score of 963 slightly exceeds the N5105's 955, but this is not reflected in any direct comparison.

Q: Why does the Celeron N5105 have a lower TDP but higher performance?

A: The N5105 uses a 10 nm Tremont architecture with a 10 W TDP, while the i3-4360T uses 22 nm Haswell at 35 W. The newer process node and the N5105's 2.90 GHz boost clock help it outperform the 3.20 GHz fixed-clock i3-4360T despite the much lower power draw.

Q: How do the core and thread counts compare?

A: The i3-4360T has 2 cores and 4 threads, using Hyper-Threading. The N5105 has 4 physical cores and 4 threads, with no Hyper-Threading. Both present four logical processors to the operating system.

Q: What memory types does each processor support?

A: The i3-4360T supports DDR3 in dual-channel mode. The N5105 supports DDR4 and LPDDR4, also dual-channel, with a recorded memory bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s.

Q: Are both processors still in production?

A: No. The Core i3-4360T is listed as Active, while the Celeron N5105 is marked End-of-life. The i3-4360T also has a recorded release date of 2014-07-20, while the N5105's release date is not recorded.