Celeron J3160 vs Athlon II X4 640

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Athlon II X4 640
2010
4 cores / 4 threads, 95 Watt
1.41
+76.3%
Celeron J3160
2016
4 cores / 4 threads, 6 Watt
0.80

Athlon II X4 640 outperforms Celeron J3160 by an impressive 76% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Athlon II X4 640 and Celeron J3160 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking22142619
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation2.920.07
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Seriesno dataIntel Celeron
Power efficiency1.4012.62
Architecture codenamePropus (2009−2011)Airmont (2016)
Release date11 May 2010 (14 years ago)15 January 2016 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$80$107

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Athlon II X4 640 has 4071% better value for money than Celeron J3160.

Detailed specifications

Athlon II X4 640 and Celeron J3160 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)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads44
Base clock speed3 GHz1.6 GHz
Boost clock speed3 GHz2.24 GHz
Bus typeno dataIDI
L1 cache128 KB (per core)no data
L2 cache512 KB (per core)2 MB
L3 cache0 KB0 KB
Chip lithography45 nm14 nm
Die size169 mm2no data
Maximum core temperatureno data90 °C
Number of transistors300 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Athlon II X4 640 and Celeron J3160 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 configuration11 (Uniprocessor)
SocketAM3FCBGA1170
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt6 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon II X4 640 and Celeron J3160. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Thermal Monitoring-+
Smart Responseno data-
GPIOno data+
Smart Connectno data-
HD Audiono data+
RSTno data-

Security technologies

Athlon II X4 640 and Celeron J3160 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
EDBno data+
Secure Bootno data+
Secure Keyno data+
Identity Protection-+
OS Guardno data-
Anti-Theftno data-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Athlon II X4 640 and Celeron J3160 are enumerated here.

VT-dno data-
VT-xno data+
VT-ino data-
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon II X4 640 and Celeron J3160. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3L-1600
Maximum memory sizeno data8 GB
Max memory channelsno data2

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Max video memoryno data8 GB
Quick Sync Video-+
Clear Videono data+
Clear Video HDno data+
Graphics max frequencyno data700 MHz
Execution Unitsno data12

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Athlon II X4 640 and Celeron J3160 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data3
eDPno data+
DisplayPort-+
HDMI-+

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Athlon II X4 640 and Celeron J3160 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno data+
OpenGLno data+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Athlon II X4 640 and Celeron J3160.

PCIe version2.02.0
PCI Express lanesno data4
USB revisionno data2.0/3.0
Total number of SATA portsno data5
Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Portsno data2
Number of USB portsno data5
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.

Athlon II X4 640 1.41
+76.3%
Celeron J3160 0.80

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.

Athlon II X4 640 2245
+76.9%
Celeron J3160 1269

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.

Athlon II X4 640 313
+82%
Celeron J3160 172

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.

Athlon II X4 640 949
+87.9%
Celeron J3160 505

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.41 0.80
Recency 11 May 2010 15 January 2016
Chip lithography 45 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 6 Watt

Athlon II X4 640 has a 76.3% higher aggregate performance score.

Celeron J3160, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 5 years, a 221.4% more advanced lithography process, and 1483.3% lower power consumption.

The Athlon II X4 640 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron J3160 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon II X4 640 and Celeron J3160, 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.


AMD Athlon II X4 640
Athlon II X4 640
Intel Celeron J3160
Celeron J3160

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.


3.7 1388 votes

Rate Athlon II X4 640 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 55 votes

Rate Celeron J3160 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Athlon II X4 640 or Celeron J3160, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.