Celeron N3000 Benchmarks & Performance Report

Sysbuilds Alpha Stage!

Please take all results with a big grain of salt. Sysbuilds is in alpha stage at the moment which can lead to wrong data, strange counting errors, silly results and more. This site is under active development.

Benchmark Results

Combined benchmark scores based on multiple data points, giving a quick overview of this processor's performance.

Overall Score

Overall score for Celeron N3000 based on all benchmark results gathered. Look at this like a meta score, you will find more specific workload ratings below.

3,829 Rank: 2005

Rank	Name	Score	Visual
2001	Intel Celeron N3160	3,833	+0.1%
2002	Atom Z3740D	3,833	+0.1%
2003	E1-2100	3,832	+0.1%
2004	Celeron N2807	3,831	+0.1%
2005	Celeron N3000	3,829
2006	C-70	3,829	+0%
2007	Athlon X2 QL-62	3,826	-0.1%
2008	Atom N550	3,825	-0.1%
2009	Celeron N2815	3,822	-0.2%
2010	Intel Celeron J3060	3,821	-0.2%

View full ranking →

Multicore Score

Multicore performance score for Celeron N3000 based on multi-threaded benchmark results.

4,241 Rank: 1929

Rank	Name	Score	Visual
1925	Atom D2500	4,244	+0.1%
1926	Athlon 64 3200+	4,243	+0%
1927	Atom D2700	4,243	+0%
1928	Core 2 Duo E8200	4,242	+0%
1929	Celeron N3000	4,241
1930	Atom N550	4,241	+0%
1931	Celeron N2807	4,241	+0%
1932	Pentium SU2700	4,241	+0%
1933	Athlon 64 2800+	4,241	+0%
1934	Athlon II X4 640	4,240	+-0%

View full ranking →

Singlecore Score

Single-core performance score for Celeron N3000 based on single-threaded benchmark results.

3,555 Rank: 2001

Rank	Name	Score	Visual
1997	Athlon X2 QL-64	3,566	+0.3%
1998	Pentium N3510	3,565	+0.3%
1999	Athlon X2 BE-2400	3,565	+0.3%
2000	Celeron N2807	3,557	+0.1%
2001	Celeron N3000	3,555
2002	Intel Celeron J3060	3,553	-0.1%
2003	Atom N550	3,548	-0.2%
2004	Intel Atom x5-Z8500	3,545	-0.3%
2005	C-60	3,545	-0.3%
2006	Celeron N2815	3,544	-0.3%

View full ranking →

Workload Scores

Performance scores grouped by workload type, normalized and aggregated from multiple raw benchmark results.

Number Crunching

Aggregated score for Celeron N3000 based on integer math, floating point math, and prime number computation benchmarks.

4,467 Rank: 1702

Rank	Name	Score	Visual
1698	Celeron N2830	4,469	+0%
1699	Celeron G460	4,469	+0%
1700	Celeron N3060	4,468	+0%
1701	Celeron N3010	4,467	+0%
1702	Celeron N3000	4,467
1703	E1-7010	4,467	+0%
1704	E1-2500	4,467	+0%
1705	Pentium SU4100	4,467	+0%
1706	Athlon II X2 250u	4,467	+0%
1707	Celeron N3050	4,466	+-0%

View full ranking →

Data Processing

Aggregated score for Celeron N3000 based on data encryption, data compression, and string sorting benchmarks.

4,441 Rank: 1693

Rank	Name	Score	Visual
1689	Celeron N3060	4,443	+0%
1690	Celeron 2957U	4,442	+0%
1691	Celeron 1007U	4,442	+0%
1692	Celeron N2830	4,441	+0%
1693	Celeron N3000	4,441
1694	Celeron B800	4,440	+-0%
1695	Celeron N3010	4,440	+-0%
1696	Pentium 987	4,439	+-0%
1697	A6-4455M	4,439	+-0%
1698	A4-4355M	4,439	+-0%

View full ranking →

Physics & Compute

Aggregated score for Celeron N3000 based on physics simulation and extended instruction set (SSE/AVX) benchmarks.

4,451 Rank: 1703

Rank	Name	Score	Visual
1699	Celeron E1400	4,452	+0%
1700	A4-3320M	4,452	+0%
1701	Pentium T4300	4,451	+0%
1702	Pentium T4200	4,451	+0%
1703	Celeron N3000	4,451
1704	Celeron N2840	4,449	+-0%
1705	Celeron N3060	4,449	+-0%
1706	Celeron N3010	4,449	+-0%
1707	Athlon II X2 250u	4,449	+-0%
1708	Celeron N2830	4,448	-0.1%

View full ranking →

Celeron N3000 Details

The Intel Celeron N3000 is a low-power, dual-core processor designed for entry-level computing tasks, offering modest performance suitable for basic productivity and media consumption. Released in the early 2010s, it has long since passed its prime in the modern computing landscape, with a 14 nm process node and a TDP of just 4 W, making it ideal for fanless or ultra-compact systems where power efficiency is prioritized over raw performance. Despite its age, the N3000 remains relevant in niche markets such as embedded systems, thin clients, and low-cost devices where thermal constraints and energy consumption are critical factors.

Built on Intel's Atom architecture, the Celeron N3000 operates at a base frequency of 1.04 GHz, capable of boosting to 1.86 GHz under load, though this occurs only briefly and under optimal conditions. It features two cores and two threads, with no support for hyper-threading, and is equipped with Intel HD Graphics, which runs at a base frequency of 320 MHz and can burst up to 800 MHz. The integrated GPU supports up to three displays, making it suitable for multi-monitor setups in light-duty environments. The processor is packaged in an FCBGA1170 socket and supports DDR3L-1600 memory in dual-channel mode, with a maximum memory capacity of 8 GB and a peak bandwidth of 21.3 GB/s.

Despite its low power draw and compact design, the Celeron N3000 delivers performance that places it near the bottom of modern CPU rankings. In Passmark benchmark tests, it achieves a single-core score of 3,555 and a multicore score of 4,241, resulting in an overall score of 3,829. This positions it at #2005 out of 2060 processors, trailing behind nearly every modern CPU, including other low-end Intel Atom and Celeron variants. It is notably slower than contemporary low-power processors like the Intel Celeron J3060 and even older models such as the Celeron N2807, which achieve higher scores despite similar TDPs.

The processor supports a range of Intel-specific features, including SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2, AES-NI encryption, and virtualization technologies like VT-x and VT-d, though these are of limited use given the N3000's constrained performance. It also includes power-saving technologies such as Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) and Intel vPro, which enhance its suitability for enterprise thin clients and managed environments. However, it lacks ECC memory support and modern security features like Intel SGX, limiting its appeal in high-reliability or secure computing scenarios.

As of March 2026, the Celeron N3000 serves as a legacy component in systems that prioritize energy efficiency over performance. It remains viable for basic web browsing, office applications, and media playback but is ill-suited for multitasking, content creation, or gaming. Its performance is outpaced by nearly every modern processor, even entry-level ones, and its primary advantage lies in its ultra-low power consumption and small form factor rather than computational capability.