Key Differences
In short — Core i3-10320 outperforms Celeron 1000M on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Core i3-10320 is 2657 days newer than Celeron 1000M.
Advantages of Intel Celeron 1000M
- Consumes up to 46% less energy than Intel Core i3-10320 - 35 vs 65 Watts
Advantages of Intel Core i3-10320
- Performs up to 11% better in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt than Celeron 1000M - 169 vs 152 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron 1000M - 8 vs 2 threads
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra+
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
FPS
169
100%
Value, €/FPS
€0.58/FPS
100%
Price, €
€97.4
100%
FPS and Value Winner
Buy for €97.4 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 111 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra+
Mobile • Jan 20th, 2013
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Celeron 1000M | vs | Intel Core i3-10320 |
---|---|---|
Jan 20th, 2013 | Release Date | Apr 30th, 2020 |
Celeron | Collection | Core i3 |
Ivy Bridge | Codename | Comet Lake |
Intel Socket G2 (988B) | Socket | Intel Socket 1200 |
Mobile | Segment | Desktop |
2 | Cores | 4 |
2 | Threads | 8 |
1.8 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.8 GHz |
Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.6 GHz |
35 W | TDP | 65 W |
22 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
18.0x | Multiplier | 38.0x |
Intel HD | Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 630 |
No | Overclockable | No |