Celeron N5095 vs J3355

VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron J3355
2016
2 cores / 2 threads, 10 Watt
0.75
Celeron N5095
2021
4 cores / 4 threads, 15 Watt
2.57
+243%

Celeron N5095 outperforms Celeron J3355 by a whopping 243% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron J3355 and Celeron N5095 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking26471731
Place by popularitynot in top-10030
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.05no data
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
SeriesIntel CeleronIntel Jasper Lake
Power efficiency7.1016.21
Architecture codenameApollo Lake (2014−2016)Jasper Lake (2021)
Release date30 August 2016 (8 years ago)11 January 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$107no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron J3355 and Celeron N5095 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)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads24
Base clock speed2 GHz2 GHz
Boost clock speed2.5 GHz2.9 GHz
Multiplier20no data
L2 cache1 MB1.5 MB
L3 cache0 KB4 MB
Chip lithography14 nm10 nm
Maximum core temperature105 °C105 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Celeron J3355 and Celeron N5095 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
SocketFCBGA1296FCBGA1338
Power consumption (TDP)10 Watt15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron J3355 and Celeron N5095. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE4.2
AES-NI++
vProno data-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Speed Shiftno data+
Turbo Boost Technology--
Hyper-Threading Technology--
Idle States++
Thermal Monitoring++
Smart Response--
GPIO++
Smart Connect-no data
Turbo Boost Max 3.0no data-
HD Audio+no data
RST-no data

Security technologies

Celeron J3355 and Celeron N5095 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+-
EDB+no data
Secure Boot+no data
Secure Key+no data
Identity Protection++
SGXno data-
OS Guard-+
Anti-Theft-no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron J3355 and Celeron N5095 are enumerated here.

VT-d++
VT-x++
VT-i-no data
EPT++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron J3355 and Celeron N5095. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3, DDR4DDR4
Maximum memory size8 GB16 GB
Max memory channels22

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Intel HD Graphics 500Intel UHD Graphics
Max video memory8 GBno data
Quick Sync Video++
Clear Video+no data
Clear Video HD+no data
Graphics max frequency700 MHz750 MHz
Execution Units1216

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron J3355 and Celeron N5095 integrated GPUs.

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

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by Celeron J3355 and Celeron N5095 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

4K resolution supportno data+
Max resolution over HDMI 1.4no data4096x2160@60Hz
Max resolution over eDPno data4096x2160@60Hz
Max resolution over DisplayPortno data4096x2160@60Hz

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Celeron J3355 and Celeron N5095 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectX+12
OpenGL+4.5

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron J3355 and Celeron N5095.

PCIe version2.0no data
PCI Express lanes68
USB revision2.0/3.02.0/3.2
Total number of SATA ports2no data
Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Ports22
Number of USB ports814
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
Celeron N5095 2.57
+243%

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
Celeron N5095 4078
+241%

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
Celeron N5095 364
+304%

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
Celeron N5095 106
+123%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.75 2.57
Integrated graphics card 0.77 5.58
Recency 30 August 2016 11 January 2021
Physical cores 2 4
Threads 2 4
Chip lithography 14 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 10 Watt 15 Watt

Celeron J3355 has 50% lower power consumption.

Celeron N5095, on the other hand, has a 242.7% higher aggregate performance score, 624.7% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 4 years, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and a 40% more advanced lithography process.

The Celeron N5095 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron J3355 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron J3355 and Celeron N5095, 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 N5095
Celeron N5095

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
3.5 1443 votes

Rate Celeron N5095 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 N5095, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.