Intel Celeron N5105 vs Intel Core i5-4330M Comparison

The Intel Core i5-4330M and Intel Celeron N5105 occupy very different positions in the mobile processor landscape, one a Haswell-era dual-core from 2013 aimed at mainstream laptops, the other a Tremont-based quad-core from the Jasper Lake family designed for low-power and fanless systems. Despite the Core i5 branding carrying more prestige, the recorded benchmark data tells a surprisingly one-sided story. Across every single Cinebench workload in the database, the Celeron N5105 posts higher scores, often by margins near 20%. The Core i5-4330M does not win a single head-to-head test. This analysis walks through the exact numbers, the architectural reasons behind them, and what the data means for anyone choosing between these two parts.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are unambiguous. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Celeron N5105 scores 341 against 274 for the Core i5-4330M, a delta of -19.6% from the perspective of the i5. That means the Celeron outperforms the Core i5 by roughly 24% in this workload. Moving to Cinebench R20 multicore, the N5105 records 1422 versus 1145, a -19.5% delta, again favoring the Celeron. The pattern holds in Cinebench R23 multicore, where the N5105 hits 3388 and the i5-4330M trails at 2727, another -19.5% difference. These multicore results are consistent across all three Cinebench generations, suggesting a stable performance advantage rather than a workload-specific anomaly.

Single-core performance follows the same trajectory. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the N5105 scores 200, while the i5-4330M manages only 161, a -19.5% delta. Cinebench R23 single-core shows the N5105 at 478 against 385 for the i5, again a -19.5% gap. Interestingly, the database does not include a Cinebench R15 single-core score for the i5-4330M, but the R20 and R23 results are sufficient to establish the trend. The Celeron’s advantage is remarkably uniform, hovering near 19.5% across every tested workload. This consistency indicates a fundamental performance difference, not just a favorable test condition.

The average benchmark scores in the database reinforce this picture. The Celeron N5105 carries an average score of 955, while the Core i5-4330M sits at 938. That difference is modest, roughly 1.8%, but it reflects a broader set of benchmarks beyond Cinebench. The Celeron’s nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon W3570 at 955 with a delta of 0, the Intel Xeon W3550 at 956, the AMD Athlon X4 870K at 956, and the Intel Core i7-950 at 957. The Core i5-4330M’s nearest rivals are the Intel Core i3-8145U at 941, the Intel Core i7-2715QE at 942, the AMD Athlon X4 860K at 943, and the AMD A8-7670K at 944. Both processors land in the 25th percentile of all CPUs tracked, meaning they sit near the lower end of the performance distribution, but the Celeron edges ahead on average.

The wins tally is decisive: the Celeron N5105 wins all five head-to-head benchmarks, while the Core i5-4330M wins none. No single test favors the older Core i5. Even accounting for the fact that the i5-4330M has a higher boost clock, 3.80 GHz against 2.90 GHz for the N5105, the newer Celeron’s architecture delivers superior throughput in every measured scenario. The data does not support any interpretation where the Core i5-4330M comes out ahead.

Architecture Differences

The performance gap traces directly to architectural choices. The Core i5-4330M is built on Intel’s Haswell architecture, a 22 nm process with 1,400 million transistors on a 118 mm² die. It packs 2 cores and 4 threads, relying on Hyper-Threading to reach that thread count. The Celeron N5105 uses the Tremont architecture on a 10 nm process, with a significantly smaller die size of 63.8 mm². Tremont is a modern low-power core design optimized for efficiency, and it offers 4 physical cores and 4 threads, matching the i5’s thread count but with two additional physical cores.

Cache hierarchies also differ substantially. Both processors share 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 256 KB of L2 cache per core for the i5-4330M, but the Celeron moves to a shared L2 configuration: 1.5 MB total, shared across all cores. The L3 cache tells a similar story: the i5-4330M has 3 MB shared, while the N5105 has 4 MB shared. That extra 1 MB of L3, combined with a larger shared L2 pool, gives the Celeron more on-die storage for frequently accessed data, which likely contributes to its higher single-core and multicore scores.

Memory support marks another clear generational divide. The Core i5-4330M supports only DDR3, with no specified memory bus or bandwidth in the database. The Celeron N5105 supports both DDR4 and LPDDR4, runs dual-channel memory, and has a recorded memory bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s. That bandwidth figure is a major differentiator, as the Celeron can feed its cores data at a much higher rate than the older DDR3 platform. The absence of a memory bandwidth figure for the i5-4330M in the database makes a direct comparison impossible, but the architectural support for newer, faster memory standards clearly favors the N5105.

Process node alone explains a large part of the efficiency story. The 22 nm Haswell die draws a 37 W TDP, while the 10 nm Tremont chip consumes only 10 W. That is a 27 W difference, making the Celeron far more suitable for passive cooling and extended battery life. The smaller die size, 63.8 mm² versus 118 mm², reflects the density advantage of the 10 nm node. The database does not list a transistor count for the N5105, so a direct transistor comparison is not possible, but the die size reduction is substantial.

Integrated graphics also differ. The Core i5-4330M ships with Intel HD 5000, while the Celeron N5105 includes UHD Graphics 24EU. The database does not provide graphics benchmarks, so no performance comparison can be drawn, but the naming conventions suggest the UHD branding is newer. Both processors are marked as mobile segments, and neither supports ECC memory. The Celeron N5105 is designated as end-of-life production status, while the i5-4330M has no recorded production status. The i5-4330M uses the Intel Socket G3, a socketed mobile design, whereas the Celeron N5105 uses Intel BGA 1338, a soldered-on-package design typical of low-power boards.

PCIe support differs as well. The Celeron N5105 lists PCIe Gen 3 with 8 lanes from the CPU only. The Core i5-4330M has no PCIe information in the database. That missing field prevents a detailed comparison, but the Celeron’s explicit PCIe Gen 3 support indicates a more modern I/O interface. The release dates also separate the two: the i5-4330M launched in August 2013, while the N5105 has no recorded release date in the database. The part number for the Celeron, SRKGV, is listed, while the i5-4330M has no part number.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher multicore performance in Cinebench R23?

A: The Intel Celeron N5105 scores 3388 in Cinebench R23 multicore, while the Intel Core i5-4330M scores 2727. The N5105 leads by a delta of -19.5% from the i5’s perspective, meaning the Celeron is roughly 24% faster.

Q: How do the two compare in single-core workloads?

A: The Celeron N5105 records 478 in Cinebench R23 single-core and 200 in Cinebench R20 single-core. The Core i5-4330M scores 385 and 161 respectively. The N5105 leads by -19.5% in both tests.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: The Intel Core i5-4330M has 2 cores and 4 threads. The Intel Celeron N5105 has 4 cores and 4 threads. Despite the Celeron having two more physical cores, both processors support the same total thread count.

Q: Which processor has a higher TDP?

A: The Intel Core i5-4330M has a TDP of 37 W, while the Intel Celeron N5105 has a TDP of 10 W. The Celeron consumes significantly less power, making it more suitable for low-power designs.

Q: What memory types does each processor support?

A: The Core i5-4330M supports only DDR3. The Celeron N5105 supports DDR4 and LPDDR4, with dual-channel memory and a recorded bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Celeron N5105 has an average benchmark score of 955, placing it in the 25th percentile of all CPUs. The Core i5-4330M has an average score of 938, also in the 25th percentile. The Celeron leads by roughly 1.8% on average.

The Verdict

The recorded data supports a clear conclusion: the Intel Celeron N5105 outperforms the Intel Core i5-4330M in every benchmark included in the database. The N5105 wins all five head-to-head Cinebench tests, with deltas consistently near -19.5% from the i5’s perspective. The average benchmark scores confirm this, with the N5105 at 955 versus 938 for the i5-4330M. For anyone prioritizing raw CPU throughput in Cinebench workloads, the Celeron is the stronger choice despite its lower-tier branding.

The architectural differences explain why. The N5105 uses a 10 nm Tremont design with 4 physical cores, 4 MB of L3 cache, and support for DDR4/LPDDR4 memory at 46.9 GB/s. The i5-4330M relies on 22 nm Haswell with 2 cores, 3 MB of L3 cache, and DDR3-only support. The newer process node and higher core count give the Celeron a decisive edge in multicore tests, while its newer memory controller and cache layout also help in single-core tests. The i5-4330M does retain a higher boost clock at 3.80 GHz versus 2.90 GHz for the N5105, but that clock advantage does not translate into higher benchmark scores.

Power consumption further favors the Celeron. The N5105 draws 10 W, while the i5-4330M draws 37 W, a 27 W difference. For mobile devices where thermal and battery constraints matter, the Celeron is clearly the more practical part. The i5-4330M does not offer any measured performance advantage to justify its higher power draw. The Celeron also has a more modern PCIe Gen 3 interface with 8 lanes, while the i5 has no recorded PCIe data.

The only area where the i5-4330M might appeal is brand perception or legacy software compatibility, but the database provides no data to support a performance-based recommendation for the older chip. The Celeron N5105 is the better performer in every measured category. The i5-4330M sits in the same 25th percentile of all CPUs, but with a lower average score and no head-to-head wins. For a user choosing between these two based purely on benchmark results, the N5105 is the clear pick.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every major specification category. The Core i5-4330M has 2 cores and 4 threads, while the Celeron N5105 has 4 cores and 4 threads. Base clocks differ: the i5 runs at 2.80 GHz, the N5105 at 2000.00 MHz, with boost clocks of 3.80 GHz and 2.90 GHz respectively. TDP is a major split, 37 W for the i5 versus 10 W for the N5105. Sockets differ, with the i5 using Intel Socket G3 and the N5105 using Intel BGA 1338. Architecture is Haswell for the i5 and Tremont for the N5105, with process nodes of 22 nm and 10 nm respectively.

Transistor counts and die sizes diverge: the i5 lists 1,400 million transistors on a 118 mm² die, while the N5105 has no transistor count but a 63.8 mm² die. Cache configurations differ notably: the i5 has 64 KB L1 per core and 256 KB L2 per core with 3 MB shared L3, while the N5105 has 64 KB L1 per core, 1.5 MB shared L2, and 4 MB shared L3. Memory support splits between DDR3 for the i5 and DDR4/LPDDR4 for the N5105, with the N5105 featuring dual-channel memory and 46.9 GB/s bandwidth, fields absent for the i5. The N5105 lists PCIe Gen 3 with 8 lanes, while the i5 has no PCIe data. Integrated graphics differ: Intel HD 5000 for the i5, UHD Graphics 24EU for the N5105. The N5105 has a part number, SRKGV, and an end-of-life production status, while the i5 has neither. Release dates differ, with the i5 launching in August 2013 and the N5105 having no recorded date. Both processors lack ECC support and unlocked multipliers, and both target the mobile market segment.