Celeron E3500 vs J3160

Aggregate performance score

Celeron J3160
2016
4 cores / 4 threads, 6 Watt
0.83
+36.1%

Celeron J3160 outperforms Celeron E3500 by a substantial 36% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron J3160 and Celeron E3500 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking25972795
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.032.99
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
SeriesIntel Celeronno data
Power efficiency12.610.86
Architecture codenameAirmont (2016)Wolfdale (2008−2010)
Release date15 January 2016 (8 years ago)29 August 2010 (14 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$107$62

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Celeron E3500 has 9867% better value for money than Celeron J3160.

Detailed specifications

Celeron J3160 and Celeron E3500 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 GHz2.7 GHz
Boost clock speed2.24 GHz2.7 GHz
Bus typeIDIno data
L1 cacheno data64 KB (per core)
L2 cache2 MB1 MB (shared)
L3 cache0 KB0 KB
Chip lithography14 nm45 nm
Die sizeno data82 mm2
Maximum core temperature90 °C74 °C
Number of transistorsno data228 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage rangeno data0.85V-1.3625V

Compatibility

Information on Celeron J3160 and Celeron E3500 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
SocketFCBGA1170LGA775
Power consumption (TDP)6 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron J3160 and Celeron E3500. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE2, Intel® SSE3, Intel® SSSE3
AES-NI+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Turbo Boost Technology--
Hyper-Threading Technology--
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring++
Smart Response-no data
GPIO+no data
Smart Connect-no data
HD Audio+no data
RST-no data

Security technologies

Celeron J3160 and Celeron E3500 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-no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron J3160 and Celeron E3500 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 E3500. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3L-1600DDR1, DDR2, DDR3
Maximum memory size8 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Max video memory8 GBno data
Quick Sync Video+-
Clear Video+no data
Clear Video HD+no data
Graphics max frequency700 MHzno data
Execution Units12no data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron J3160 and Celeron E3500 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported3no data
eDP+no data
DisplayPort+-
HDMI+-

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Celeron J3160 and Celeron E3500 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 E3500.

PCIe version2.02.0
PCI Express lanes4no data
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.


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 J3160 0.83
+36.1%
Celeron E3500 0.61

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
+35.7%
Celeron E3500 935

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 E3500 290
+68.6%

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
+14%
Celeron E3500 443

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.83 0.61
Recency 15 January 2016 29 August 2010
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Chip lithography 14 nm 45 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 6 Watt 65 Watt

Celeron J3160 has a 36.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, a 221.4% more advanced lithography process, and 983.3% lower power consumption.

The Celeron J3160 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron E3500 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron J3160 and Celeron E3500, 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 E3500
Celeron E3500

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
3.3 27 votes

Rate Celeron E3500 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 E3500, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.