Celeron J3355 vs m3-6Y30

VS

Aggregate performance score

Core m3-6Y30
2015
2 cores / 4 threads, 4 Watt
1.39
+80.5%
Celeron J3355
2016
2 cores / 2 threads, 10 Watt
0.77

Core m3-6Y30 outperforms Celeron J3355 by an impressive 81% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core m3-6Y30 and Celeron J3355 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking22302645
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.02
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesIntel Core m3Intel Celeron
Power efficiency28.697.15
Architecture codenameSkylake-Y (2015)Apollo Lake (2014−2016)
Release date1 September 2015 (9 years ago)30 August 2016 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$281$107

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Core m3-6Y30 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 cores2 (Dual-core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads42
Base clock speed0.9 GHz2 GHz
Boost clock speed2.2 GHz2.5 GHz
Bus typeDMI 3.0no data
Bus rate4 GT/sno data
Multiplier920
L1 cache128 KBno data
L2 cache512 KB1 MB
L3 cache4 MB (shared)0 KB
Chip lithography14 nm14 nm
Die size98.57 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature100 °C105 °C
Number of transistors1750 Millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Core m3-6Y30 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)
SocketFCBGA1515FCBGA1296
Power consumption (TDP)4.5 Watt10 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core m3-6Y30 and Celeron J3355. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2no data
AES-NI++
AVX+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
My WiFi+no data
Turbo Boost Technology2.0-
Hyper-Threading Technology+-
Idle States++
Thermal Monitoring++
Flex Memory Access+no data
Smart Response+-
GPIOno data+
Smart Connectno data-
HD Audiono data+
RSTno data-

Security technologies

Core m3-6Y30 and Celeron J3355 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-+
EDB++
Secure Bootno data+
Secure Key++
MPX+-
Identity Protection-+
SGXYes with Intel® MEno data
OS Guard+-
Anti-Theftno data-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core m3-6Y30 and Celeron J3355 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-d++
VT-x++
VT-ino data-
EPT++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core m3-6Y30 and Celeron J3355. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3, DDR4
Maximum memory size16 GB8 GB
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidth29.861 GB/sno data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Intel HD Graphics 515Intel HD Graphics 500
Max video memory16 GB8 GB
Quick Sync Video++
Clear Video++
Clear Video HD++
Graphics max frequency850 MHz700 MHz
Execution Unitsno data12
InTru 3D+-

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Core m3-6Y30 and Celeron J3355 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported33
eDP++
DisplayPort++
HDMI++
DVI+no data
MIPI-DSIno data+

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by Core m3-6Y30 and Celeron J3355 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

4K resolution support+no data
Max resolution over HDMI 1.44096x2304@24Hzno data
Max resolution over eDP3840x2160@60Hzno data
Max resolution over DisplayPort3840x2160@60Hzno data
Max resolution over VGAN/Ano data

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Core m3-6Y30 and Celeron J3355 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectX12+
OpenGL4.5+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core m3-6Y30 and Celeron J3355.

PCIe version3.02.0
PCI Express lanes106
USB revisionno data2.0/3.0
Total number of SATA portsno data2
Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Portsno data2
Number of USB portsno data8
Integrated LANno data-
UARTno 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.

m3-6Y30 1.39
+80.5%
Celeron J3355 0.77

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.

m3-6Y30 2169
+81.2%
Celeron J3355 1197

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

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

m3-6Y30 204
+127%
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.

m3-6Y30 86
+79.6%
Celeron J3355 48

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.39 0.77
Integrated graphics card 1.64 0.77
Recency 1 September 2015 30 August 2016
Threads 4 2
Power consumption (TDP) 4 Watt 10 Watt

m3-6Y30 has a 80.5% higher aggregate performance score, 113% faster integrated GPU, 100% more threads, and 150% lower power consumption.

Celeron J3355, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 11 months.

The Core m3-6Y30 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron J3355 in performance tests.

Be aware that Core m3-6Y30 is a notebook processor while Celeron J3355 is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core m3-6Y30 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 Core m3-6Y30
Core m3-6Y30
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.


3.6 73 votes

Rate Core m3-6Y30 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 Core m3-6Y30 or Celeron J3355, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.