Processor N200 vs Celeron J3355

VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron J3355
2016
2 cores / 2 threads, 10 Watt
0.75
Processor N200
2023
4 cores / 4 threads, 6 Watt
1.56
+108%

Processor N200 outperforms Celeron J3355 by a whopping 108% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking26632122
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.06no data
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
SeriesIntel CeleronIntel Alder Lake-N
Power efficiency7.1024.61
Architecture codenameApollo Lake (2014−2016)Alder Lake-N (2023)
Release date30 August 2016 (8 years ago)3 January 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$107$193

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron J3355 and Processor 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)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads24
Base clock speed2 GHz0.1 GHz
Boost clock speed2.5 GHz3.7 GHz
Multiplier20no data
L1 cacheno data96 KB (per core)
L2 cache1 MB2 MB (shared)
L3 cache0 KB6 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm10 nm
Maximum core temperature105 °C105 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+

Compatibility

Information on Celeron J3355 and Processor 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
SocketFCBGA1296Intel BGA 1264
Power consumption (TDP)10 Watt6 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron J3355 and Processor N200. 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
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Smart Response-no data
GPIO+no data
Smart Connect-no data
HD Audio+no data
RST-no data

Security technologies

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

TXT++
EDB+no data
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 J3355 and Processor N200 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 J3355 and Processor N200. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3, DDR4DDR4, DDR5 4800 MHz Single-channel
Maximum memory size8 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Intel HD Graphics 500Intel UHD Graphics Xe 750 32EUs (Rocket Lake) (450 - 750 MHz)
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 J3355 and Processor N200 integrated GPUs.

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

Graphics API support

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

DirectX+no data
OpenGL+no data

Peripherals

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

PCIe version2.03.0
PCI Express lanes69
USB revision2.0/3.0no data
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
Processor N200 1.56
+108%

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.

Celeron J3355 90
Processor N200 219
+143%

Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R15 (standing for Release 15) is a benchmark made by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version (sometimes called Single-Thread) only uses a single processor thread to render a room full of reflective spheres and light sources.

Celeron J3355 48
Processor N200 113
+137%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.75 1.56
Integrated graphics card 0.77 3.29
Recency 30 August 2016 3 January 2023
Physical cores 2 4
Threads 2 4
Chip lithography 14 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 10 Watt 6 Watt

Processor N200 has a 108% higher aggregate performance score, 327.3% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 6 years, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, a 40% more advanced lithography process, and 66.7% lower power consumption.

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

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


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron J3355 and Processor 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 Processor N200
Processor 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
3.3 148 votes

Rate Processor 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 Processor N200, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.