Atom C3338 vs Celeron J4025
Aggregate performance score
Celeron J4025 outperforms Atom C3338 by a considerable 43% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Celeron J4025 and Atom C3338 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2526 | 2766 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 2.67 | 0.06 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Server |
| Series | no data | Intel Atom |
| Power efficiency | 8.80 | 6.83 |
| Architecture codename | Gemini Lake Refresh (2019) | Goldmont (2016−2017) |
| Release date | 4 November 2019 (5 years ago) | 22 February 2017 (7 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $107 | $27 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Celeron J4025 has 4350% better value for money than Atom C3338.
Detailed specifications
Celeron J4025 and Atom C3338 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 cores | 2 (Dual-core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 2 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | 2 GHz | 1.5 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.9 GHz | 2.2 GHz |
| Multiplier | no data | 15 |
| L1 cache | 56 KB (per core) | 112 KB |
| L2 cache | 4 MB (shared) | 4 MB |
| L3 cache | no data | 4 MB |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 93 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | 105 °C | 89 °C |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | + | - |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron J4025 and Atom C3338 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 configuration | 1 | 1 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | Intel BGA 1090 | FCBGA1310 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 10 Watt | 8.5 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron J4025 and Atom C3338. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| QuickAssist | no data | - |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | 2.0 |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | - |
Security technologies
Celeron J4025 and Atom C3338 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| EDB | no data | + |
| Secure Boot | no data | + |
| Secure Key | no data | + |
| SGX | no data | - |
| OS Guard | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron J4025 and Atom C3338 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | + | + |
| VT-x | + | + |
| EPT | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron J4025 and Atom C3338. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 | DDR4: 1866 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 128 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 1 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 14.936 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Intel UHD Graphics 600 (250 - 700 MHz) | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron J4025 and Atom C3338.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | 3 |
| PCI Express lanes | 6 | 10 |
| USB revision | no data | 3 |
| Total number of SATA ports | no data | 10 |
| Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Ports | no data | 10 |
| Number of USB ports | no data | 8 |
| Integrated LAN | no data | 4x2.5/1 GBE |
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.93 | 0.65 |
| Recency | 4 November 2019 | 22 February 2017 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 10 Watt | 8 Watt |
Celeron J4025 has a 43.1% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 2 years.
Atom C3338, on the other hand, has 25% lower power consumption.
The Celeron J4025 is our recommended choice as it beats the Atom C3338 in performance tests.
Note that Celeron J4025 is a desktop processor while Atom C3338 is a server/workstation one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron J4025 and Atom C3338, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
