Atom x5-Z8500 vs Celeron J3160

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-Z8500 vs Celeron J3160 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-Z8500 vs Celeron J3160: 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-Z8500

2015

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,242 vs 1,250).

Celeron J3160

2016

Why buy it

✅+0.6% higher PassMark.

Trade-offs

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

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron J3160 better than Atom x5-Z8500?

Yes. Celeron J3160 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you 0.6% better PassMark and the stronger long-term platform, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

For gaming, this matchup is basically a tie in the data we have.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Celeron J3160 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.6% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads.

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

Celeron J3160 still makes the most sense overall. Celeron J3160 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 0.6% higher PassMark.

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

Celeron J3160 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2016 vs 2015) 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.

Atom x5-Z8500 vs Celeron J3160 Technical Specifications

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

Atom x5-Z8500

The Atom x5-Z8500 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2 March 2015 (10 years ago). It is based on the Cherry Trail (2015−2016) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.44 GHz, with boost up to 2.24 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 2 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: UTFCBGA1380. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,242 points. Launch price was $69.

Celeron J3160

The Celeron J3160 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 15 January 2016 (9 years ago). It is based on the Airmont (2016) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.6 GHz, with boost up to 2.24 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 2 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1170. Thermal design power (TDP): 6 Watt. Memory support: DDR3L-1600. Passmark benchmark score: 1,250 points. Launch price was $107.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Atom x5-Z8500 and Celeron J3160 share an identical 4-core/4-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.24 GHz on the Atom x5-Z8500 versus 2.24 GHz on the Celeron J3160 — identical boost frequencies (base: 1.44 GHz vs 1.6 GHz). The Atom x5-Z8500 uses the Cherry Trail (2015−2016) architecture (14 nm), while the Celeron J3160 uses Airmont (2016) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Atom x5-Z8500 scores 1,242 against the Celeron J3160's 1,250 — a 0.6% lead for the Celeron J3160. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

Feature	Atom x5-Z8500	Celeron J3160
Cores / Threads	4 / 4	4 / 4
Boost Clock	2.24 GHz	2.24 GHz
Base Clock	1.44 GHz	1.6 GHz+11%
L3 Cache	0 kB	0 kB
L2 Cache	2 MB	2 MB
Process	14 nm	14 nm
Architecture	Cherry Trail (2015−2016)	Airmont (2016)
PassMark	1,242	1,250
Geekbench 6 Single	—	350
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	650

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Atom x5-Z8500 uses the UTFCBGA1380 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Celeron J3160 uses FCBGA1170 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to LPDDR3-1600 memory speed. Both support up to 8 GB of RAM. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 2 (Atom x5-Z8500) vs 4 (Celeron J3160) — the Celeron J3160 offers 2 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Intel FC-UTBGA592 (Atom x5-Z8500) and N/A (SoC) (Celeron J3160).

Feature	Atom x5-Z8500	Celeron J3160
Socket	UTFCBGA1380	FCBGA1170
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	LPDDR3-1600	DDR3L-1600
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	8 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	2	4+100%

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: not specified (Atom x5-Z8500) / VT-x (Celeron J3160). Both include integrated graphics — Intel HD Graphics (Cherry Trail) (Atom x5-Z8500) and HD Graphics 400 (Celeron J3160) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron J3160 targets Low Power. Direct competitor: Celeron J3160 rivals Pentium J3710.