Athlon II X4 630 vs Celeron J3455E

Athlon II X4 630 vs Celeron J3455E Performance Spectrum

Athlon II X4 630

4 / 4

2,175

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Celeron J3455E

4 / 4

2,193

+0.8%

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 X4 630 vs Celeron J3455E 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 X4 630 vs Celeron J3455E: 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 X4 630

2009

Why buy it

✅166.7% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 6) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Celeron J3455E.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (2,175 vs 2,193).
❌Launch MSRP is still $129 MSRP, while Celeron J3455E mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌850% higher power demand at 95W vs 10W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron J3455E can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Celeron J3455E

2019

Why buy it

✅+0.8% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 10W instead of 95W, a 85W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics 500, while Athlon II X4 630 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Athlon II X4 630.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron J3455E better than Athlon II X4 630?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Athlon II X4 630 is ahead with a 0.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Celeron J3455E pulls ahead with 0.8% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Celeron J3455E is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.8% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads.

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

Celeron J3455E is still the much better call for a fresh build. Celeron J3455E comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $129 MSRP, and it still gives you 0.8% better PassMark. Athlon II X4 630 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2009 platform. Even with 100.0% better value on paper (16.9 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), 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 J3455E makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2019 vs 2009) and more multi-core headroom with 4 cores / 4 threads instead of 4/4. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Athlon II X4 630 vs Celeron J3455E Technical Specifications

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

Athlon II X4 630

The Athlon II X4 630 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 16 September 2009 (16 years ago). It is based on the Propus (2009−2011) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.8 GHz, with boost up to 2.8 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: AM3. Thermal design power (TDP): 95 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,175 points. Launch price was $63.

Celeron J3455E

The Celeron J3455E is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.5 GHz, with boost up to 2.3 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Thermal design power (TDP): 10 Watt. Memory support: DDR3L/LPDDR3 up to 1866 MT/s; LPDDR4 up to 2400 MT/s. Passmark benchmark score: 2,193 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Athlon II X4 630 and Celeron J3455E share an identical 4-core/4-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.8 GHz on the Athlon II X4 630 versus 2.3 GHz on the Celeron J3455E — a 19.6% clock advantage for the Athlon II X4 630 (base: 2.8 GHz vs 1.5 GHz). The Athlon II X4 630 is built on the Propus (2009−2011) architecture. In PassMark, the Athlon II X4 630 scores 2,175 against the Celeron J3455E's 2,193 — a 0.8% lead for the Celeron J3455E. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Athlon II X4 630 vs 2 MB on the Celeron J3455E.

Feature	Athlon II X4 630	Celeron J3455E
Cores / Threads	4 / 4	4 / 4
Boost Clock	2.8 GHz+22%	2.3 GHz
Base Clock	2.8 GHz+87%	1.5 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	2 MB
L2 Cache	512 kB (per core)	—
Process	45 nm	14 nm-69%
Architecture	Propus (2009−2011)	—
PassMark	2,175	2,193
Geekbench 6 Single	—	450
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	850

🧠

Memory & Platform

Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1333 on the Athlon II X4 630 versus DDR4-2400 on the Celeron J3455E — the Celeron J3455E supports 80% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Athlon II X4 630 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: 16 (Athlon II X4 630) vs 6 (Celeron J3455E) — the Athlon II X4 630 offers 10 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Socket AM3 (Athlon II X4 630) and N/A (SoC) (Celeron J3455E).

Feature	Athlon II X4 630	Celeron J3455E
Socket	AM3	—
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	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16+167%	6

🔧

Advanced Features

Only the Athlon II X4 630 has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Virtualization support: AMD-V (Athlon II X4 630) vs VT-x (Celeron J3455E). The Celeron J3455E includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics 500), while the Athlon II X4 630 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron J3455E targets Low Power. Direct competitor: Celeron J3455E rivals Pentium J4205.