Celeron J3355 vs N3150

Aggregate performance score

Celeron N3150
2015
4 cores / 4 threads, 6 Watt
0.75
Celeron J3355
2016
2 cores / 2 threads, 10 Watt
0.75

Primary details

Comparing Celeron N3150 and Celeron J3355 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking26512647
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.05
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesIntel CeleronIntel Celeron
Power efficiency11.837.10
Architecture codenameBraswell (2015−2016)Apollo Lake (2014−2016)
Release date1 April 2015 (9 years ago)30 August 2016 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$107$107

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron N3150 and Celeron J3355 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads42
Base clock speed1.6 GHz2 GHz
Boost clock speed2.08 GHz2.5 GHz
Bus typeIDIno data
Multiplierno data20
L2 cache2 MB1 MB
L3 cache0 KB0 KB
Chip lithography14 nm14 nm
Maximum core temperature90 °C105 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Celeron N3150 and Celeron J3355 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)
SocketFCBGA1170FCBGA1296
Power consumption (TDP)6 Watt10 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron N3150 and Celeron J3355. 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 N3150 and Celeron J3355 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

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

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron N3150 and Celeron J3355 are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron N3150 and Celeron J3355. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3, DDR4
Maximum memory size8 GB8 GB
Max memory channels22

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Intel HD Graphics for Intel Celeron Processor N3000 SeriesIntel HD Graphics 500
Max video memory8 GB8 GB
Quick Sync Video++
Clear Video++
Clear Video HD++
Graphics max frequency640 MHz700 MHz
Execution Units1212
InTru 3D--

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron N3150 and Celeron J3355 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported33
eDP++
DisplayPort++
HDMI++
MIPI-DSIno data+

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Celeron N3150 and Celeron J3355 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectX++
OpenGL++

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron N3150 and Celeron J3355.

PCIe version2.02.0
PCI Express lanes46
USB revision2.0/3.02.0/3.0
Total number of SATA ports22
Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Ports22
Number of USB ports58
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 N3150 0.75
Celeron J3355 0.75

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 N3150 1192
Celeron J3355 1197
+0.4%

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 N3150 164
Celeron J3355 273
+66.5%

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 N3150 499
+8.5%
Celeron J3355 460

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

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

Celeron N3150 118
+31.1%
Celeron J3355 90

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 N3150 32
Celeron J3355 48
+48.8%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Recency 1 April 2015 30 August 2016
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Power consumption (TDP) 6 Watt 10 Watt

Celeron N3150 has 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and 66.7% lower power consumption.

Celeron J3355, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Celeron N3150 and Celeron J3355.

Be aware that Celeron N3150 is a notebook processor while Celeron J3355 is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron N3150 and Celeron J3355, 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 N3150
Celeron N3150
Intel Celeron J3355
Celeron J3355

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.


3.3 58 votes

Rate Celeron N3150 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 58 votes

Rate Celeron J3355 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron N3150 or Celeron J3355, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.