Celeron J3060 vs Atom x7835RE
Aggregate performance score
Atom x7835RE outperforms Celeron J3060 by a whopping 934% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 1594 | 3272 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 21.09 | 0.02 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | no data | Intel Celeron |
| Power efficiency | 35.19 | 6.81 |
| Designer | Intel | Intel |
| Manufacturer | Intel | no data |
| Architecture codename | Amston Lake (2024−2025) | Airmont (2016) |
| Release date | 8 April 2024 (1 year ago) | 15 January 2016 (9 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $127 | $107 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Atom x7835RE has 105350% better value for money than Celeron J3060.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
Atom x7835RE and Celeron J3060 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 | 8 (Octa-Core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 8 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | 1.3 GHz | 1.6 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.6 GHz | 2.48 GHz |
| Bus type | no data | IDI |
| L1 cache | 96 KB (per core) | no data |
| L2 cache | 2 MB (per module) | 1 MB |
| L3 cache | 6 MB (shared) | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 10 nm | 14 nm |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 90 °C |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | no data | - |
Compatibility
Information on Atom x7835RE and Celeron J3060 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 1264 | FCBGA1170 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 12 Watt | 6 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Atom x7835RE and Celeron J3060. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | - |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | - |
| Thermal Monitoring | - | + |
| Smart Response | no data | - |
| GPIO | no data | + |
| Smart Connect | no data | - |
| HD Audio | no data | + |
| RST | no data | - |
Security technologies
Atom x7835RE and Celeron J3060 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | - |
| EDB | no data | + |
| Secure Boot | no data | + |
| Identity Protection | - | + |
| OS Guard | no data | - |
| Anti-Theft | no data | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Atom x7835RE and Celeron J3060 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 Atom x7835RE and Celeron J3060. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4, DDR5 | DDR3L-1600 |
| 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 | Intel UHD Graphics 32EU | no data |
| Max video memory | no data | 8 GB |
| Quick Sync Video | - | + |
| Clear Video | no data | + |
| Clear Video HD | no data | + |
| Graphics max frequency | no data | 700 MHz |
| Execution Units | no data | 12 |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Atom x7835RE and Celeron J3060 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | no data | 3 |
| eDP | no data | + |
| DisplayPort | - | + |
| HDMI | - | + |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by Atom x7835RE and Celeron J3060 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | no data | + |
| OpenGL | no data | + |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Atom x7835RE and Celeron J3060.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | 2.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 9 | 4 |
| USB revision | no data | 2.0/3.0 |
| Total number of SATA ports | no data | 2 |
| Number of USB ports | no data | 5 |
| Integrated LAN | no data | - |
| UART | no data | + |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
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. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 3.93 | 0.38 |
| Recency | 8 April 2024 | 15 January 2016 |
| Physical cores | 8 | 2 |
| Threads | 8 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 10 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 12 Watt | 6 Watt |
Atom x7835RE has a 934.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads, and a 40% more advanced lithography process.
Celeron J3060, on the other hand, has 100% lower power consumption.
The Intel Atom x7835RE is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Celeron J3060 in performance tests.
Be aware that Atom x7835RE is a notebook processor while Celeron J3060 is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
