CPU
GPU
Athlon II X2 255
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 II X2 255 is positioned at rank 793 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 II X2 255
Performance Per Dollar Celeron J3355
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Athlon II X2 255 | Celeron J3355 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ❌ Lower gaming performance | ✅ Superior gaming performance |
| Workstation | ✅ Better multi-core power | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks |
| Price | ⚠️ Higher cost ($10) | ✅ More affordable ($0) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Regor (2009−2013) / 45 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Apollo Lake (2014−2016) / 14 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Athlon II X2 255 | Celeron J3355 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️ Higher cost ($10) | ✅ 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 II X2 255 and Celeron J3355
Athlon II X2 255
The Athlon II X2 255 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 25 January 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Regor (2009−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 3.1 GHz, with boost up to 3.1 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: AM3. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,210 points. Launch price was $60.
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 II X2 255 and Celeron J3355 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 3.1 GHz on the Athlon II X2 255 versus 2.5 GHz on the Celeron J3355 — a 21.4% clock advantage for the Athlon II X2 255 (base: 3.1 GHz vs 2 GHz). The Athlon II X2 255 uses the Regor (2009−2013) architecture (45 nm), while the Celeron J3355 uses Apollo Lake (2014−2016) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon II X2 255 scores 1,210 against the Celeron J3355's 1,203 — a 0.6% lead for the Athlon II X2 255. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 265 vs 450, a 51.7% lead for the Celeron J3355 that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 500 vs 850 (51.9% advantage for the Celeron J3355). Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.
| Feature | Athlon II X2 255 | Celeron J3355 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 2 / 2 |
| Boost Clock | 3.1 GHz+24% | 2.5 GHz |
| Base Clock | 3.1 GHz+55% | 2 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 1 MB |
| Process | 45 nm | 14 nm-69% |
| Architecture | Regor (2009−2013) | Apollo Lake (2014−2016) |
| PassMark | 1,210 | 1,203 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 265 | 450+70% |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 500 | 850+70% |
Memory & Platform
The Athlon II X2 255 uses the AM3 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron J3355 uses FCBGA1296 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1333 on the Athlon II X2 255 versus DDR4-2400 on the Celeron J3355 — the Celeron J3355 supports 28.6% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Athlon II X2 255 supports up to 16 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 66.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 0 (Athlon II X2 255) vs 6 (Celeron J3355) — the Celeron J3355 offers 6 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: 760G,780G,785G,790GX,870,880G,890GX,890FX (Athlon II X2 255) and N/A (SoC) (Celeron J3355).
| Feature | Athlon II X2 255 | Celeron J3355 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | AM3 | FCBGA1296 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 2.0 | PCIe 3.0+50% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR3-1333 | DDR4-2400+33% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 16 GB+100% | 8 GB |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | ✅ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | 6 |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: AMD-V (Athlon II X2 255) vs VT-x (Celeron J3355). The Celeron J3355 includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics 500), while the Athlon II X2 255 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Athlon II X2 255 targets Legacy Desktop, Celeron J3355 targets Low Power. Direct competitor: Athlon II X2 255 rivals Pentium E5700; Celeron J3355 rivals Pentium J4205.
| Feature | Athlon II X2 255 | Celeron J3355 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | Yes |
| IGPU Model | — | HD Graphics 500 |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | AMD-V | VT-x |
| Target Use | Legacy Desktop | 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 II X2 255 and Celeron J3355
