A6-7310 vs Celeron J4115

A6-7310 vs Celeron J4115 Performance Spectrum

A6-7310

4 / 4

2,689

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Celeron J4115

4 / 4

2,688

0.0%

About PassMark

PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

A6-7310 vs Celeron J4115 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

A6-7310 vs Celeron J4115: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

A6-7310

2015

Why buy it

✅+0% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 2W instead of 4W, a 2W reduction.
✅166.7% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 6) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.

Celeron J4115

2019

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (2,688 vs 2,689).
❌100% higher power demand at 4W vs 2W.

Quick Answers

So, is A6-7310 better than Celeron J4115?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Celeron J4115 is ahead with a 2.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, A6-7310 pulls ahead with 0% better PassMark.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, A6-7310 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

A6-7310 still makes the most sense overall. A6-7310 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 0% better PassMark.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Celeron J4115 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2019 vs 2015). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

A6-7310 vs Celeron J4115 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

A6-7310

The A6-7310 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Carrizo-L (2015) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2 GHz, with boost up to 2.4 GHz. L2 cache: 2048 kB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: FP4. Thermal design power (TDP): 2 MB. Memory support: DDR3L-1866. Passmark benchmark score: 2,689 points. Launch price was $70.

Celeron J4115

The Celeron J4115 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Gemini Lake (2019) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.8 GHz, with boost up to 2.5 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB. L2 cache: 4 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1090. Thermal design power (TDP): 10 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 2,688 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the A6-7310 and Celeron J4115 share an identical 4-core/4-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.4 GHz on the A6-7310 versus 2.5 GHz on the Celeron J4115 — a 4.1% clock advantage for the Celeron J4115 (base: 2 GHz vs 1.8 GHz). The A6-7310 uses the Carrizo-L (2015) architecture (28 nm), while the Celeron J4115 uses Gemini Lake (2019) (14 nm). In PassMark, the A6-7310 scores 2,689 against the Celeron J4115's 2,688 — a 0% lead for the A6-7310.

Feature	A6-7310	Celeron J4115
Cores / Threads	4 / 4	4 / 4
Boost Clock	2.4 GHz	2.5 GHz+4%
Base Clock	2 GHz+11%	1.8 GHz
L3 Cache	—	4 MB
L2 Cache	2048 kB	4 MB+100%
Process	28 nm	14 nm-50%
Architecture	Carrizo-L (2015)	Gemini Lake (2019)
PassMark	2,689	2,688

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A6-7310 uses the FP4 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Celeron J4115 uses FCBGA1090 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 1600 on the A6-7310 versus 2400 on the Celeron J4115 — the Celeron J4115 supports 50% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The A6-7310 supports up to 16 of RAM compared to 8 — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 1 (A6-7310) vs 2 (Celeron J4115). PCIe lanes: 16 (A6-7310) vs 6 (Celeron J4115) — the A6-7310 offers 10 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: FT3b,FP4 (A6-7310) and BGA1090 (Celeron J4115).

Feature	A6-7310	Celeron J4115
Socket	FP4	FCBGA1090
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	1600	2400+50%
Max RAM Capacity	16+100%	8
RAM Channels	1	2+100%
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16+167%	6

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Both support true virtualization. Both include integrated graphics — Radeon R4 Graphics (A6-7310) and Intel UHD Graphics 600 (Celeron J4115) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Direct competitor: A6-7310 rivals Pentium N3700; Celeron J4115 rivals Ryzen Embedded R1305G.