Athlon II X2 255 vs Celeron J3355

Athlon II X2 255 vs Celeron J3355 Performance Spectrum

Athlon II X2 255

2 / 2

1,210

+0.6%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Celeron J3355

2 / 2

1,203

0.0%

Atom E3827

Celeron 877

Pentium Dual-Core E2180

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.

Athlon II X2 255 vs Celeron J3355 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.

Athlon II X2 255 vs Celeron J3355: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Athlon II X2 255

2010

Why buy it

✅Includes a boxed cooler (Stock), unlike Celeron J3355.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench single-core performance for gaming (265 vs 450).
❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (500 vs 850).
❌Launch MSRP is still $60 MSRP, while Celeron J3355 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌550% higher power demand at 65W vs 10W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron J3355 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Celeron J3355

2016

Why buy it

✅+69.8% higher Geekbench single-core performance for gaming and desktop responsiveness.
✅Draws 10W instead of 65W, a 55W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (6 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics 500, while Athlon II X2 255 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Athlon II X2 255.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron J3355 better than Athlon II X2 255?

Yes. Celeron J3355 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you 70% better Geekbench multi-core and the stronger long-term platform, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Celeron J3355 has the edge because it leads the single-thread side of this matchup with 69.8% stronger Geekbench single-core performance.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Celeron J3355 is the stronger fit. You are getting 70% better Geekbench multi-core, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Celeron J3355 is still the much better call for a fresh build. Celeron J3355 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $60 MSRP, and it still gives you 0.6% higher PassMark. Athlon II X2 255 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2010 platform. Even with 100.0% better value on paper (20.2 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on AM3.

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

Celeron J3355 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2016 vs 2010) and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 2 threads instead of 2/2. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Athlon II X2 255 vs Celeron J3355 Technical Specifications

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

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 80% 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 — 100% 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+80%
Max RAM Capacity	16 GB+100%	8 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	Yes	No
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.