Celeron J4005 vs Atom C3558
Aggregate performance score
Atom C3558 outperforms Celeron J4005 by an impressive 56% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Atom C3558 and Celeron J4005 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2123 | 2473 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.47 | 1.00 |
| Market segment | Server | Desktop processor |
| Series | Intel Atom | Intel Celeron |
| Power efficiency | 9.05 | 9.27 |
| Architecture codename | Goldmont (2016−2017) | Goldmont Plus (2017) |
| Release date | 15 August 2017 (7 years ago) | 11 December 2017 (6 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $86 | $107 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Celeron J4005 has 113% better value for money than Atom C3558.
Detailed specifications
Atom C3558 and Celeron J4005 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 | 4 (Quad-Core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | 2.2 GHz | 2 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.2 GHz | 2.7 GHz |
| Multiplier | 22 | 20 |
| L1 cache | 224 KB | 56 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 8 MB | 4 MB (shared) |
| L3 cache | 8 MB | 4 MB |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | no data | 93 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 83 °C | 105 °C |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Atom C3558 and Celeron J4005 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 (Uniprocessor) | 1 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | FCBGA1310 | FCBGA1090 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 16 Watt | 10 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Atom C3558 and Celeron J4005. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | Intel® SSE4.2 |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| QuickAssist | + | no data |
| Speed Shift | no data | - |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | - |
| Idle States | no data | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | - | + |
| Smart Response | no data | - |
| GPIO | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Max 3.0 | no data | - |
Security technologies
Atom C3558 and Celeron J4005 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| EDB | + | + |
| Secure Boot | + | no data |
| Secure Key | + | + |
| MPX | - | + |
| Identity Protection | - | + |
| SGX | - | Yes with Intel® ME |
| OS Guard | + | + |
| Anti-Theft | no data | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Atom C3558 and Celeron J4005 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | + | + |
| VT-x | + | + |
| EPT | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Atom C3558 and Celeron J4005. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4: 2133 | DDR4 |
| Maximum memory size | 256 GB | 8 GB |
| Max memory channels | 2 | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 29.871 GB/s | 38.397 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | + | - |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | Intel UHD Graphics 600 |
| Max video memory | no data | 8 GB |
| Quick Sync Video | - | + |
| Graphics max frequency | no data | 700 MHz |
| Execution Units | no data | 12 |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Atom C3558 and Celeron J4005 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | no data | 3 |
| eDP | no data | + |
| DisplayPort | - | + |
| HDMI | - | + |
| MIPI-DSI | no data | + |
Graphics image quality
Maximum display resolutions supported by Atom C3558 and Celeron J4005 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.
| 4K resolution support | no data | + |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by Atom C3558 and Celeron J4005 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | no data | 12 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.4 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Atom C3558 and Celeron J4005.
| PCIe version | 3 | 2.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 12 | 6 |
| USB revision | 3 | 2.0/3.0 |
| Total number of SATA ports | 12 | 2 |
| Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Ports | 12 | 2 |
| Number of USB ports | 8 | 8 |
| Integrated LAN | 2x10/2.5/1 GBE + 2x2.5/1 GBE | - |
| 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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.53 | 0.98 |
| Recency | 15 August 2017 | 11 December 2017 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 2 |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 16 Watt | 10 Watt |
Atom C3558 has a 56.1% higher aggregate performance score, and 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.
Celeron J4005, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 months, and 60% lower power consumption.
The Atom C3558 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron J4005 in performance tests.
Be aware that Atom C3558 is a server/workstation processor while Celeron J4005 is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Atom C3558 and Celeron J4005, 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.
