Celeron N3160 vs J4025
Aggregate performance score
Celeron J4025 outperforms Celeron N3160 by a significant 22% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Celeron J4025 and Celeron N3160 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2526 | 2660 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 2.67 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | no data | Intel Celeron |
| Power efficiency | 8.80 | 17.97 |
| Architecture codename | Gemini Lake Refresh (2019) | Braswell (2015−2016) |
| Release date | 4 November 2019 (5 years ago) | 15 January 2016 (8 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $107 | $107 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Celeron J4025 and Celeron N3160 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) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 2 GHz | 1.6 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.9 GHz | 2.24 GHz |
| Bus type | no data | IDI |
| L1 cache | 56 KB (per core) | no data |
| L2 cache | 4 MB (shared) | 2 MB |
| L3 cache | no data | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 93 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | 105 °C | 90 °C |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | + | - |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron J4025 and Celeron N3160 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 | FCBGA1170 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 10 Watt | 6 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron J4025 and Celeron N3160. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | - |
| Idle States | no data | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | - | + |
| Smart Response | no data | - |
| GPIO | no data | + |
| Smart Connect | no data | - |
| HD Audio | no data | + |
| RST | no data | - |
Security technologies
Celeron J4025 and Celeron N3160 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | - |
| EDB | no data | + |
| Secure Boot | no data | + |
| Secure Key | no data | + |
| Identity Protection | - | + |
| OS Guard | no data | - |
| Anti-Theft | no data | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron J4025 and Celeron N3160 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | + | - |
| VT-x | + | + |
| VT-i | no data | - |
| EPT | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron J4025 and Celeron N3160. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 | DDR3 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 8 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | Intel UHD Graphics 600 (250 - 700 MHz) | Intel HD Graphics (Braswell) (320 - 640 MHz) |
| Max video memory | no data | 8 GB |
| Quick Sync Video | - | + |
| Clear Video | no data | + |
| Clear Video HD | no data | + |
| Graphics max frequency | no data | 640 MHz |
| Execution Units | no data | 12 |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Celeron J4025 and Celeron N3160 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | no data | 3 |
| eDP | no data | + |
| DisplayPort | - | + |
| HDMI | - | + |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by Celeron J4025 and Celeron N3160 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | no data | + |
| OpenGL | no data | + |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron J4025 and Celeron N3160.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | 2.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 6 | 4 |
| USB revision | no data | 2.0/3.0 |
| Total number of SATA ports | no data | 2 |
| Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Ports | no data | 2 |
| Number of USB ports | no data | 5 |
| Integrated LAN | no data | - |
| UART | no data | + |
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.
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.93 | 0.76 |
| Integrated graphics card | 0.87 | 0.62 |
| Recency | 4 November 2019 | 15 January 2016 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 4 |
| Threads | 2 | 4 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 10 Watt | 6 Watt |
Celeron J4025 has a 22.4% higher aggregate performance score, 40.3% faster integrated GPU, and an age advantage of 3 years.
Celeron N3160, on the other hand, has 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and 66.7% lower power consumption.
The Celeron J4025 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron N3160 in performance tests.
Note that Celeron J4025 is a desktop processor while Celeron N3160 is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron J4025 and Celeron N3160, 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.
