N200 vs Celeron J3355

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron J3355
2016
2 cores / 2 threads, 10 Watt
0.75

N200 outperforms Celeron J3355 by a whopping 328% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron J3355 and N200 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking26451597
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.02no data
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
SeriesIntel Celeronno data
Power efficiency7.1050.63
Architecture codenameApollo Lake (2014−2016)no data
Release date30 August 2016 (8 years ago)1 January 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$107no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron J3355 and N200 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)no data
Threads24
Base clock speed2 GHzno data
Boost clock speed2.5 GHz3.7 GHz
Multiplier20no data
L2 cache1 MBno data
L3 cache0 KB6 MB Intel® Smart Cache
Chip lithography14 nmIntel 7 nm
Maximum core temperature105 °C105 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data

Compatibility

Information on Celeron J3355 and N200 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
SocketFCBGA1296FCBGA1264
Power consumption (TDP)10 Watt6 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron J3355 and N200. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2
AES-NI++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Speed Shiftno data+
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology--
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring++
Smart Response-no data
GPIO++
Smart Connect-no data
HD Audio+no data
RST-no data

Security technologies

Celeron J3355 and N200 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

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

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron J3355 and N200 are enumerated here.

VT-d++
VT-x++
VT-i-no data
EPT++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron J3355 and N200. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3, DDR4DDR4-3200, DDR5-4800, LPDDR5-4800
Maximum memory size8 GB16 GB
Max memory channels21

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Intel HD Graphics 500Intel UHD Graphics
Max video memory8 GBno data
Quick Sync Video++
Clear Video+no data
Clear Video HD+no data
Graphics max frequency700 MHz750 MHz
Execution Units1232

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron J3355 and N200 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported33
eDP+no data
DisplayPort+-
HDMI+-
MIPI-DSI+no data

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by Celeron J3355 and N200 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

4K resolution supportno data+
Max resolution over HDMI 1.4no data4096 x 2160@60Hz
Max resolution over DisplayPortno data4096 x 2160@60Hz

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Celeron J3355 and N200 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectX+12.1
OpenGL+4.6

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron J3355 and N200.

PCIe version2.0no data
PCI Express lanes69
USB revision2.0/3.02.0/3.2
Total number of SATA ports2no data
Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Ports2no data
Number of USB ports8no 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 J3355 0.75
N200 3.21
+328%

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 J3355 1197
N200 5106
+327%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.75 3.21
Integrated graphics card 0.77 5.58
Recency 30 August 2016 1 January 2023
Threads 2 4
Power consumption (TDP) 10 Watt 6 Watt

N200 has a 328% higher aggregate performance score, 624.7% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 6 years, 100% more threads, and 66.7% lower power consumption.

The N200 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron J3355 in performance tests.

Note that Celeron J3355 is a desktop processor while N200 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron J3355 and N200, 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 J3355
Celeron J3355
Intel N200
N200

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.


2.8 58 votes

Rate Celeron J3355 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 33 votes

Rate N200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron J3355 or N200, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.