Celeron N3350 vs J3355

Aggregate performance score

Celeron J3355
2016
2 cores / 2 threads, 10 Watt
0.75
+7.1%
Celeron N3350
2016
2 cores / 2 threads, 6 Watt
0.70

Celeron J3355 outperforms Celeron N3350 by a small 7% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron J3355 and Celeron N3350 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking26452705
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.02no data
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
SeriesIntel CeleronIntel Celeron
Power efficiency7.1011.04
Architecture codenameApollo Lake (2014−2016)Apollo Lake (2014−2016)
Release date30 August 2016 (8 years ago)30 August 2016 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$107$24

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron J3355 and Celeron N3350 basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.

Physical cores2 (Dual-core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads22
Base clock speed2 GHz1.1 GHz
Boost clock speed2.5 GHz2.4 GHz
Multiplier2011
L2 cache1 MB1 MB
L3 cache0 KB0 KB
Chip lithography14 nm14 nm
Maximum core temperature105 °C105 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Celeron J3355 and Celeron N3350 compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.

Number of CPUs in a configuration1 (Uniprocessor)1 (Uniprocessor)
SocketFCBGA1296FCBGA1296
Power consumption (TDP)10 Watt6 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron J3355 and Celeron N3350. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Turbo Boost Technology--
Hyper-Threading Technology--
Idle States++
Thermal Monitoring++
Smart Response--
GPIO++
Smart Connect--
HD Audio++
RST--

Security technologies

Celeron J3355 and Celeron N3350 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT++
EDB++
Secure Boot++
Secure Key++
MPX-+
Identity Protection++
OS Guard-+
Anti-Theft--

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron J3355 and Celeron N3350 are enumerated here.

VT-d++
VT-x++
VT-i--
EPT++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron J3355 and Celeron N3350. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3, DDR4DDR3, DDR4
Maximum memory size8 GB8 GB
Max memory channels22

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel HD Graphics 500Intel HD Graphics 500
Max video memory8 GB8 GB
Quick Sync Video++
Clear Video++
Clear Video HD++
Graphics max frequency700 MHz650 MHz
Execution Units1212
InTru 3D--

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron J3355 and Celeron N3350 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported33
eDP++
DisplayPort++
HDMI++
MIPI-DSI++

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Celeron J3355 and Celeron N3350 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectX++
OpenGL++

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron J3355 and Celeron N3350.

PCIe version2.02.0
PCI Express lanes66
USB revision2.0/3.02.0/3.0
Total number of SATA ports22
Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Ports22
Number of USB ports88
Integrated LAN--
UART++

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

Celeron J3355 0.75
+7.1%
Celeron N3350 0.70

Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

Celeron J3355 1197
+8.1%
Celeron N3350 1107

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

Celeron J3355 273
+7.9%
Celeron N3350 253

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

Celeron J3355 460
+10%
Celeron N3350 418

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.

Celeron J3355 90
+5.9%
Celeron N3350 85

Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R15 (standing for Release 15) is a benchmark made by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version (sometimes called Single-Thread) only uses a single processor thread to render a room full of reflective spheres and light sources.

Celeron J3355 48
+3.5%
Celeron N3350 46

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.75 0.70
Power consumption (TDP) 10 Watt 6 Watt

Celeron J3355 has a 7.1% higher aggregate performance score.

Celeron N3350, on the other hand, has 66.7% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Celeron J3355 and Celeron N3350.

Note that Celeron J3355 is a desktop processor while Celeron N3350 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron J3355 and Celeron N3350, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


Intel Celeron J3355
Celeron J3355
Intel Celeron N3350
Celeron N3350

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


2.8 58 votes

Rate Celeron J3355 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 956 votes

Rate Celeron N3350 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron J3355 or Celeron N3350, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.