Athlon II X4 740 vs Celeron J4115

Athlon II X4 740 vs Celeron J4115 Performance Spectrum

Athlon II X4 740

4 / 4

2,677

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Celeron J4115

4 / 4

2,688

+0.4%

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 740 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.

Athlon II X4 740 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.

Athlon II X4 740

2012

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +4.3% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅166.7% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 6) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (2,677 vs 2,688).
❌Launch MSRP is still $71 MSRP, while Celeron J4115 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌1525% higher power demand at 65W vs 4W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron J4115 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Celeron J4115

2019

Why buy it

✅+0.4% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 4W instead of 65W, a 61W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel UHD Graphics 600, while Athlon II X4 740 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Athlon II X4 740 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron J4115 better than Athlon II X4 740?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Athlon II X4 740 is ahead with a 4.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Celeron J4115 pulls ahead with 0.4% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Celeron J4115 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.4% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads.

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

Celeron J4115 is still the much better call for a fresh build. Celeron J4115 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $71 MSRP, and it still gives you 0.4% better PassMark. Athlon II X4 740 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2012 platform. Even with 100.0% better value on paper (37.7 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on FM2.

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 2012) 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 740 vs Celeron J4115 Technical Specifications

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

Athlon II X4 740

The Athlon II X4 740 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 1 October 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Piledriver architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3.2 GHz, with boost up to 3.7 GHz. L2 cache: 4 MB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FM2. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 watt. Passmark benchmark score: 2,677 points. Launch price was $71.

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 Athlon II X4 740 and Celeron J4115 share an identical 4-core/4-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 3.7 GHz on the Athlon II X4 740 versus 2.5 GHz on the Celeron J4115 — a 38.7% clock advantage for the Athlon II X4 740 (base: 3.2 GHz vs 1.8 GHz). The Athlon II X4 740 uses the Piledriver architecture (32 nm), while the Celeron J4115 uses Gemini Lake (2019) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon II X4 740 scores 2,677 against the Celeron J4115's 2,688 — a 0.4% lead for the Celeron J4115.

Feature	Athlon II X4 740	Celeron J4115
Cores / Threads	4 / 4	4 / 4
Boost Clock	3.7 GHz+48%	2.5 GHz
Base Clock	3.2 GHz+78%	1.8 GHz
L3 Cache	—	4 MB
L2 Cache	4 MB	4 MB
Process	32 nm	14 nm-56%
Architecture	Piledriver	Gemini Lake (2019)
PassMark	2,677	2,688

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Athlon II X4 740 uses the FM2 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron J4115 uses FCBGA1090 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1866 on the Athlon II X4 740 versus 2400 on the Celeron J4115 — the Celeron J4115 supports 28.6% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Athlon II X4 740 supports up to 64 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 700% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 16 (Athlon II X4 740) vs 6 (Celeron J4115) — the Athlon II X4 740 offers 10 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: AMD FM2 (Athlon II X4 740) and BGA1090 (Celeron J4115).

Feature	Athlon II X4 740	Celeron J4115
Socket	FM2	FCBGA1090
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 3.0+50%
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1866	2400+29%
Max RAM Capacity	64 GB+700%	8 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16+167%	6

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: not specified (Athlon II X4 740) / true (Celeron J4115). The Celeron J4115 includes integrated graphics (Intel UHD Graphics 600), while the Athlon II X4 740 requires a dedicated GPU. Direct competitor: Celeron J4115 rivals Ryzen Embedded R1305G.