Celeron 887 vs J3160

Primary details

Comparing Celeron J3160 and Celeron 887 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking2603not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.03no data
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
SeriesIntel CeleronIntel Celeron
Power efficiency12.62no data
Architecture codenameAirmont (2016)Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)
Release date15 January 2016 (8 years ago)1 September 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$107$86

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron J3160 and Celeron 887 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)2 (Dual-core)
Threads42
Base clock speed1.6 GHz1.5 GHz
Boost clock speed2.24 GHz1.5 GHz
Bus typeIDIDMI 2.0
Bus rateno data4 × 5 GT/s
Multiplierno data15
L1 cacheno data64K (per core)
L2 cache2 MB256K (per core)
L3 cache0 KB2 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm32 nm
Die sizeno data131 mm2
Maximum core temperature90 °C100 °C
Number of transistorsno data504 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Celeron J3160 and Celeron 887 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)
SocketFCBGA1170FCBGA1023
Power consumption (TDP)6 Watt17 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron J3160 and Celeron 887. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2
AES-NI+-
FMA-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
My WiFino data-
Turbo Boost Technology--
Hyper-Threading Technology--
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring++
Flex Memory Accessno data+
Smart Response-no data
Demand Based Switchingno data-
GPIO+no data
Smart Connect-no data
FDIno data+
Fast Memory Accessno data+
HD Audio+no data
RST-no data

Security technologies

Celeron J3160 and Celeron 887 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT--
EDB++
Secure Boot+no data
Secure Key+no data
Identity Protection+-
OS Guard-no data
Anti-Theft--

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron J3160 and Celeron 887 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 Celeron J3160 and Celeron 887. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3L-1600DDR3
Maximum memory size8 GB16 GB
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidthno data21.335 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataIntel® HD Graphics for 2nd Generation Intel® Processors
Max video memory8 GBno data
Quick Sync Video+-
Clear Video+-
Clear Video HD+-
Graphics max frequency700 MHz1 GHz
Execution Units12no data
InTru 3D--

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron J3160 and Celeron 887 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported32
eDP++
DisplayPort++
HDMI++
SDVOno data+
CRTno data+

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Celeron J3160 and Celeron 887 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectX+no data
OpenGL+no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron J3160 and Celeron 887.

PCIe version2.02.0
PCI Express lanes416
USB revision2.0/3.0no data
Total number of SATA ports5no data
Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Ports2no data
Number of USB ports5no data
Integrated LAN-no data
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.



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 J3160 1269
+68.3%
Celeron 887 754

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 J3160 172
Celeron 887 244
+41.9%

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 J3160 505
+17.4%
Celeron 887 430

Pros & cons summary


Recency 15 January 2016 1 September 2012
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Chip lithography 14 nm 32 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 6 Watt 17 Watt

Celeron J3160 has an age advantage of 3 years, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, a 128.6% more advanced lithography process, and 183.3% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Celeron J3160 and Celeron 887. We've got no test results to judge.

Note that Celeron J3160 is a desktop processor while Celeron 887 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron J3160 and Celeron 887, 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 J3160
Celeron J3160
Intel Celeron 887
Celeron 887

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 55 votes

Rate Celeron J3160 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.5 17 votes

Rate Celeron 887 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron J3160 or Celeron 887, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.