Athlon 64 FX-60 vs Celeron J3355
Athlon 64 FX-60
Celeron J3355
Performance Spectrum - CPU
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.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (PassMark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The Athlon 64 FX-60 is positioned at rank 1119 and the Celeron J3355 is on rank 425, so the Celeron J3355 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Athlon 64 FX-60
Performance Per Dollar Celeron J3355
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Athlon 64 FX-60 | Celeron J3355 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ❌ Lower gaming performance | ✅ Superior gaming performance |
| Workstation | ✅ Better multi-core power | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks |
| Price | ⚠️ Higher cost ($1,000) | ✅ More affordable ($0) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Toledo (2006) / 90 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Apollo Lake (2014−2016) / 14 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Athlon 64 FX-60 | Celeron J3355 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️ Higher cost ($1,000) | ✅ More affordable ($0) |
Performance Check
To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.
Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Athlon 64 FX-60 and Celeron J3355
Athlon 64 FX-60
The Athlon 64 FX-60 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2009-01-01. It is based on the Toledo (2006) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 2.6 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 2 MB. Built on 90 nm process technology. Socket: 939. Thermal design power (TDP): 110 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 1,205 points. Launch price was $149.
Celeron J3355
The Celeron J3355 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 30 August 2016 (9 years ago). It is based on the Apollo Lake (2014−2016) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2 GHz, with boost up to 2.5 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1296. Thermal design power (TDP): 10 Watt. Memory support: DDR3, DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 1,203 points. Launch price was $107.
Processing Power
Both the Athlon 64 FX-60 and Celeron J3355 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.6 GHz on the Athlon 64 FX-60 versus 2.5 GHz on the Celeron J3355 — a 3.9% clock advantage for the Athlon 64 FX-60. The Athlon 64 FX-60 uses the Toledo (2006) architecture (90 nm), while the Celeron J3355 uses Apollo Lake (2014−2016) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon 64 FX-60 scores 1,205 against the Celeron J3355's 1,203 — a 0.2% lead for the Athlon 64 FX-60. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 250 vs 450, a 57.1% lead for the Celeron J3355 that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 480 vs 850 (55.6% advantage for the Celeron J3355). Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.
| Feature | Athlon 64 FX-60 | Celeron J3355 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 2 / 2 |
| Boost Clock | 2.6 GHz+4% | 2.5 GHz |
| Base Clock | — | 2 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+100% | 1 MB |
| Process | 90 nm | 14 nm-84% |
| Architecture | Toledo (2006) | Apollo Lake (2014−2016) |
| PassMark | 1,205 | 1,203 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 250 | 450+80% |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 480 | 850+77% |
Memory & Platform
The Athlon 64 FX-60 uses the 939 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Celeron J3355 uses FCBGA1296 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR-400 on the Athlon 64 FX-60 versus DDR4-2400 on the Celeron J3355 — the Celeron J3355 supports -204% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron J3355 supports up to 8 GB of RAM compared to 4 GB — 66.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 0 (Athlon 64 FX-60) vs 6 (Celeron J3355) — the Celeron J3355 offers 6 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: nForce4,K8T890 (Athlon 64 FX-60) and N/A (SoC) (Celeron J3355).
| Feature | Athlon 64 FX-60 | Celeron J3355 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | 939 | FCBGA1296 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 1.1 | PCIe 3.0+173% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR-400 | DDR4-2400 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 4 GB | 8 GB+100% |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | 6 |
Advanced Features
Only the Athlon 64 FX-60 has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Virtualization support: None (Athlon 64 FX-60) vs VT-x (Celeron J3355). The Celeron J3355 includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics 500), while the Athlon 64 FX-60 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Athlon 64 FX-60 targets Gaming/Enthusiast, Celeron J3355 targets Low Power. Direct competitor: Celeron J3355 rivals Pentium J4205.
| Feature | Athlon 64 FX-60 | Celeron J3355 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | Yes |
| IGPU Model | — | HD Graphics 500 |
| Unlocked | Yes | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | None | VT-x |
| Target Use | Gaming/Enthusiast | Low Power |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Athlon 64 FX-60 and Celeron J3355
