Celeron J3355 vs G3900

VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron G3900
2015
2 cores / 2 threads, 51 Watt
1.39
+80.5%
Celeron J3355
2016
2 cores / 2 threads, 10 Watt
0.77

Celeron G3900 outperforms Celeron J3355 by an impressive 81% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron G3900 and Celeron J3355 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking22312645
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.180.02
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
SeriesIntel CeleronIntel Celeron
Power efficiency2.537.15
Architecture codenameSkylake (2015−2016)Apollo Lake (2014−2016)
Release date19 October 2015 (9 years ago)30 August 2016 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$42$107

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Celeron G3900 has 800% better value for money than Celeron J3355.

Detailed specifications

Celeron G3900 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)
Threads22
Base clock speed2.8 GHz2 GHz
Boost clock speed2.8 GHz2.5 GHz
Bus typeDMI 3.0no data
Bus rate4 × 8 GT/sno data
Multiplier2820
L1 cache128 KBno data
L2 cache512 KB1 MB
L3 cache2 MB0 KB
Chip lithography14 nm14 nm
Die size98.57 mm2no data
Maximum core temperatureno data105 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)65 °Cno data
Number of transistors1,400 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Celeron G3900 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)
SocketFCLGA1151FCBGA1296
Power consumption (TDP)51 Watt10 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron G3900 and Celeron J3355. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2no data
AES-NI++
AVX+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Turbo Boost Technology--
Hyper-Threading Technology--
Idle States++
Thermal Monitoring++
Smart Responseno data-
GPIOno data+
Smart Connectno data-
HD Audiono data+
RSTno data-

Security technologies

Celeron G3900 and Celeron J3355 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

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

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron G3900 and Celeron J3355 are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron G3900 and Celeron J3355. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3, DDR4DDR3, DDR4
Maximum memory size64 GB8 GB
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidth34.134 GB/sno data
ECC memory support+-

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Intel HD Graphics 510Intel HD Graphics 500
Max video memory64 GB8 GB
Quick Sync Video++
Clear Video++
Clear Video HD++
Graphics max frequency950 MHz700 MHz
Execution Unitsno data12
InTru 3D+-

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron G3900 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 Celeron G3900 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 eDP4096x2304@60Hzno data
Max resolution over DisplayPort4096x2304@60Hzno data
Max resolution over VGAN/Ano data

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Celeron G3900 and Celeron J3355 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectX12+
OpenGL4.4+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron G3900 and Celeron J3355.

PCIe version3.02.0
PCI Express lanes166
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.

Celeron G3900 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.

Celeron G3900 2164
+80.8%
Celeron J3355 1197

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 G3900 585
+115%
Celeron J3355 272

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 G3900 1001
+120%
Celeron J3355 456

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.39 0.77
Integrated graphics card 1.61 0.77
Recency 19 October 2015 30 August 2016
Power consumption (TDP) 51 Watt 10 Watt

Celeron G3900 has a 80.5% higher aggregate performance score, and 109.1% faster integrated GPU.

Celeron J3355, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 10 months, and 410% lower power consumption.

The Celeron G3900 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron J3355 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron G3900 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 G3900
Celeron G3900
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.


3.1 222 votes

Rate Celeron G3900 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 G3900 or Celeron J3355, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.