Atom x5-Z8330 vs Celeron J3060

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.

Atom x5-Z8330 vs Celeron J3060 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.

Atom x5-Z8330 vs Celeron J3060: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Atom x5-Z8330

2016

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +3.9% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.

Trade-offs

❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.

Celeron J3060

2016

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Atom x5-Z8330 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (1,015 vs 1,025).

Quick Answers

So, is Atom x5-Z8330 better than Celeron J3060?

Yes. Atom x5-Z8330 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 3.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 1% better PassMark, 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, Atom x5-Z8330 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 3.9% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Atom x5-Z8330 is the stronger fit. You are getting 1% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads.

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

Atom x5-Z8330 still makes the most sense overall. Atom x5-Z8330 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 3.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

Atom x5-Z8330 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting more multi-core headroom with 4 cores / 4 threads instead of 2/2. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Atom x5-Z8330 vs Celeron J3060 Technical Specifications

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

Atom x5-Z8330

The Atom x5-Z8330 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 8 February 2016 (9 years ago). It is based on the Airmont (2016) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.44 GHz, with boost up to 1.92 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 2 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Memory support: DDR3L-RS 1600. Passmark benchmark score: 1,025 points. Launch price was $69.

Celeron J3060

The Celeron J3060 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 15 January 2016 (9 years ago). It is based on the Airmont (2016) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.6 GHz, with boost up to 2.48 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1170. Thermal design power (TDP): 6 Watt. Memory support: DDR3L-1600. Passmark benchmark score: 1,015 points. Launch price was $107.

⚡

Processing Power

The Atom x5-Z8330 packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Celeron J3060 offers 2 cores / 2 threads — the Atom x5-Z8330 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 1.92 GHz on the Atom x5-Z8330 versus 2.48 GHz on the Celeron J3060 — a 25.5% clock advantage for the Celeron J3060 (base: 1.44 GHz vs 1.6 GHz). Both are built on the Airmont (2016) architecture using a 14 nm process. In PassMark, the Atom x5-Z8330 scores 1,025 against the Celeron J3060's 1,015 — a 1% lead for the Atom x5-Z8330. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

Feature	Atom x5-Z8330	Celeron J3060
Cores / Threads	4 / 4+100%	2 / 2
Boost Clock	1.92 GHz	2.48 GHz+29%
Base Clock	1.44 GHz	1.6 GHz+11%
L3 Cache	0 kB	0 kB
L2 Cache	2 MB+100%	1 MB
Process	14 nm	14 nm
Architecture	Airmont (2016)	Airmont (2016)
PassMark	1,025	1,015
Geekbench 6 Single	—	200
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	370

🧠

Memory & Platform

Both support up to DDR3L-RS 1600 memory speed. The Celeron J3060 supports up to 8 GB of RAM compared to 2 GB — 300% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 1 (Atom x5-Z8330) vs 2 (Celeron J3060). PCIe lanes: 1 (Atom x5-Z8330) vs 4 (Celeron J3060) — the Celeron J3060 offers 3 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Intel FC-UTBGA592 (Atom x5-Z8330) and SoC (Celeron J3060).

Feature	Atom x5-Z8330	Celeron J3060
Socket	—	FCBGA1170
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3L-RS 1600	DDR3L-1600
Max RAM Capacity	2 GB	8 GB+300%
RAM Channels	1	2+100%
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	1	4+300%

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: not specified (Atom x5-Z8330) / VT-x, EPT (Celeron J3060). Both include integrated graphics — Intel HD Graphics (Cherry Trail) (Atom x5-Z8330) and Intel HD Graphics 400 (Celeron J3060) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron J3060 targets Low Power Desktop/NAS. Direct competitor: Celeron J3060 rivals Pentium J3710.

Feature	Atom x5-Z8330	Celeron J3060
Integrated GPU	Yes	Yes
IGPU Model	Intel HD Graphics (Cherry Trail)	Intel HD Graphics 400
Unlocked	—	No
AVX-512	—	No
Virtualization	—	VT-x, EPT
Target Use	—	Low Power Desktop/NAS