Celeron N3350 vs J4005

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron J4005
2017
2 cores / 2 threads, 10 Watt
1.01
+40.3%

J4005 outperforms N3350 by a considerable 40% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron J4005 and Celeron N3350 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking23612594
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.41no data
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
SeriesIntel CeleronIntel Celeron
Architecture codenameGemini Lake (2019)Apollo Lake (2016)
Release date11 December 2017 (6 years ago)1 September 2016 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$107$24
Current price$425 (4x MSRP)$251 (10.5x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron J4005 and Celeron N3350 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 GHz1.1 GHz
Boost clock speed2.7 GHz2.4 GHz
L1 cache112 KBno data
L2 cache4 MB2 MB
L3 cache4 MB0 KB
Chip lithography14 nm14 nm
Maximum core temperature105 °C105 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility+-
Unlocked multiplierNoNo

Compatibility

Information on Celeron J4005 and Celeron N3350 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 configuration11
SocketFCBGA1090FCBGA1296
Power consumption (TDP)10 Watt6 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron J4005 and Celeron N3350. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.2no data
AES-NI++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Speed Shift-no data
Turbo Boost Technology--
Hyper-Threading Technology--
Idle States++
Thermal Monitoring++
SIPPno data-
Smart Response--
GPIO++
Smart Connectno data-
Turbo Boost Max 3.0-no data
StatusDiscontinuedLaunched
HD Audiono data+
RSTno data-

Security technologies

Celeron J4005 and Celeron N3350 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+
EDB++
Secure Bootno data+
Secure Key++
MPX++
Identity Protection++
SGXYes with Intel® MEno data
OS Guard++
Anti-Theft--

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron J4005 and Celeron N3350 are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron J4005 and Celeron N3350. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4DDR3, DDR4
Maximum memory size8 GB8 GB
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidth38.397 GB/sno data
ECC memory support--

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Intel UHD Graphics 600Intel HD Graphics 500
Max video memory8 GB8 GB
Quick Sync Video++
Clear Videono data+
Clear Video HDno data+
Graphics max frequency700 MHz650 MHz
Execution Units1212

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron J4005 and Celeron N3350 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported33
eDP++
DisplayPort++
HDMI++
MIPI-DSI++

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by Celeron J4005 and Celeron N3350 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

4K resolution support+no data

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Celeron J4005 and Celeron N3350 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectX12+
OpenGL4.4+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron J4005 and Celeron N3350.

PCIe version2.02.0
PCI Express lanes66
USB revision2.0/3.02.0/3.0
Total number of SATA ports22
Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Ports22
Number of USB ports88
Integrated LAN--
UART++

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 J4005 1.01
+40.3%
Celeron N3350 0.72

J4005 outperforms N3350 by 40% based on our aggregate benchmark results.


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.

Benchmark coverage: 68%

Celeron J4005 1567
+41.4%
Celeron N3350 1108

J4005 outperforms N3350 by 41% in Passmark.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 42%

Celeron J4005 345
+36.4%
Celeron N3350 253

J4005 outperforms N3350 by 36% in GeekBench 5 Single-Core.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 42%

Celeron J4005 583
+40.1%
Celeron N3350 416

J4005 outperforms N3350 by 40% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

Benchmark coverage: 20%

Celeron J4005 2085
+39.9%
Celeron N3350 1490

J4005 outperforms N3350 by 40% in Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core.

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

Celeron J4005 3500
+31.9%
Celeron N3350 2654

J4005 outperforms N3350 by 32% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.

wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

Benchmark coverage: 18%

Celeron J4005 33.07
+37.6%
Celeron N3350 45.5

N3350 outperforms J4005 by 38% in wPrime 32.

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

Celeron J4005 1
+25.2%
Celeron N3350 1

J4005 outperforms N3350 by 25% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core.

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

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

Benchmark coverage: 15%

Celeron J4005 144
+69.4%
Celeron N3350 85

J4005 outperforms N3350 by 69% in Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 15%

Celeron J4005 77
+67.4%
Celeron N3350 46

J4005 outperforms N3350 by 67% in Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core.

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R11.5 is an old benchmark 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 loads a single thread with ray tracing to render a glossy room full of crystal spheres and light sources.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

Celeron J4005 0.85
+44.1%
Celeron N3350 0.59

J4005 outperforms N3350 by 44% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core.

TrueCrypt AES

TrueCrypt is a discontinued piece of software that was widely used for on-the-fly-encryption of disk partitions, now superseded by VeraCrypt. It contains several embedded performance tests, one of them being TrueCrypt AES, which measures data encryption speed using AES algorithm. Result is encryption speed in gigabytes per second.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

Celeron J4005 1
+47.7%
Celeron N3350 0.7

J4005 outperforms N3350 by 48% in TrueCrypt AES.

WinRAR 4.0

WinRAR 4.0 is an outdated version of a popular file archiver. It contains an internal speed test, using 'Best' setting of RAR compression on large chunks of randomly generated data. Its results are measured in kilobytes per second.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

Celeron J4005 798
+29.5%
Celeron N3350 616

J4005 outperforms N3350 by 30% in WinRAR 4.0.

x264 encoding pass 2

x264 Pass 2 is a slower variant of x264 video compression that produces a variable bit rate output file, which results in better quality since the higher bit rate is used when it is needed more. Benchmark result is still measured in frames per second.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

Celeron J4005 10
+60.6%
Celeron N3350 6

J4005 outperforms N3350 by 61% in x264 encoding pass 2.

x264 encoding pass 1

x264 version 4.0 is a video encoding benchmark uses MPEG 4 x264 compression method to compress a sample HD (720p) video. Pass 1 is a faster variant that produces a constant bit rate output file. Its result is measured in frames per second, which means how many frames of the source video file were encoded per second.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

Celeron J4005 50
+53.6%
Celeron N3350 33

J4005 outperforms N3350 by 54% in x264 encoding pass 1.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.01 0.72
Integrated graphics card 0.86 0.75
Recency 11 December 2017 1 September 2016
Cost $107 $24
Power consumption (TDP) 10 Watt 6 Watt

The Celeron J4005 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron N3350 in performance tests.

Note that Celeron J4005 is a desktop processor while Celeron N3350 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron J4005 and Celeron N3350, 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 J4005
Celeron J4005
Intel Celeron N3350
Celeron N3350

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.


3.1 155 votes

Rate Celeron J4005 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 902 votes

Rate Celeron N3350 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron J4005 or Celeron N3350, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.