Intel Celeron N4120 vs Intel Celeron N5095

The Intel Celeron N4120 and Intel Celeron N5095 are processors designed for economical and basic computing needs.

They target the entry-level device segment, such as inexpensive laptops, mini-PCs, and thin clients, where energy efficiency and cost-effectiveness are paramount. The Intel Celeron N4120 is based on the Gemini Lake architecture and is manufactured using a 14-nm process. It features four cores and four threads.

The Intel Celeron N5095, on the other hand, utilizes the newer Jasper Lake architecture and is produced using a more advanced 10-nm process. It also has four cores and four threads but benefits from the more efficient manufacturing. The Intel Celeron N4120 has 0 MB of L2 cache and 4 MB of L3 cache, while the Intel Celeron N5095 is equipped with 2 MB of L2 cache and also 4 MB of L3 cache.

In terms of performance, the Intel Celeron N5095 shows significantly higher performance in benchmark tests for both single-core and multi-core tasks. The single-core performance of the Intel Celeron N5095 is over 35 percent better than that of the Intel Celeron N4120. In multi-core performance, the Intel Celeron N5095 also surpasses its predecessor by more than 30 percent.

These differences are due to architectural improvements and the more efficient manufacturing process. Neither processor is designed for gaming scenarios. They feature integrated graphics units: the Intel Celeron N4120 with Intel UHD Graphics 600 and the Intel Celeron N5095 with Intel UHD Graphics 16 EUs (Jasper Lake).

The newer graphics unit of the Intel Celeron N5095 offers slightly better graphics performance but is still only suitable for very simple or older games at low settings. The maximum memory throughput for the Intel Celeron N4120 is 38 GB/s and for the Intel Celeron N5095 is 47 GB/s, which limits their graphics capabilities.

Both processors are known for their low power consumption. They belong to the Celeron N-series, which is designed for energy efficiency, making them ideal for fanless designs or devices with low power requirements. The Intel Celeron N5095 further benefits here from the 10-nm process, which generally enables higher efficiency per watt.

Regarding value for money, both processors offer a cost-effective solution for basic computing applications. The Intel Celeron N5095, at a potentially slightly higher price, offers noticeably better overall performance and efficiency, making it the more attractive choice for a slightly more responsive user experience.

In summary, the Intel Celeron N5095 is the more powerful option of the two processors. It offers improved performance for everyday tasks and a more efficient architecture. For use cases requiring very basic performance and maximum cost savings, the Intel Celeron N4120 may still be sufficient. For a smoother user experience in web browsing, office applications, and media playback, the Intel Celeron N5095 is the clearly better recommendation.