C-60 vs Celeron N4000

C-60 vs Celeron N4000 Performance Spectrum

C-60

2 / 2

1,483

+0.7%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Celeron N4000

2 / 2

1,472

0.0%

Celeron J1800

Pentium Dual-Core E2200

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.

C-60 vs Celeron N4000 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.

C-60 vs Celeron N4000: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

C-60

2011

Why buy it

✅+0.7% higher PassMark.
✅Costs $57 less on MSRP ($50 MSRP vs $107 MSRP).
✅Delivers 115.6% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 29.7 vs 13.8 PassMark/$ ($50 MSRP vs $107 MSRP).
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (4 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Radeon HD 6290, while Celeron N4000 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌50% higher power demand at 9W vs 6W.

Celeron N4000

2017

Why buy it

✅Draws 6W instead of 9W, a 3W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,472 vs 1,483).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 13.8 vs 29.7 PassMark/$ ($107 MSRP vs $50 MSRP).
❌No integrated graphics, while C-60 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron N4000 better than C-60?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Celeron N4000 is ahead with a 2.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, C-60 pulls ahead with 0.7% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, C-60 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.7% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Celeron N4000 is the easy recommendation for a fresh desktop build. Celeron N4000 comes in 114.0% more expensive on MSRP at $107 MSRP versus $50 MSRP, and it still gives you a 2.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. C-60 only looks good on raw value math because it is a cheap legacy laptop chip, not because it is a real desktop gaming recommendation. It simply does not keep up in modern games.

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

Celeron N4000 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2017 vs 2011). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

C-60 vs Celeron N4000 Technical Specifications

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

C-60

The C-60 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 22 August 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Ontario (2011−2012) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1 GHz, with boost up to 1.33 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 40 nm process technology. Socket: FT1. Thermal design power (TDP): 9 Watt. Memory support: DDR3 Single-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 1,483 points. Launch price was $69.

Celeron N4000

The Celeron N4000 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 11 December 2017 (7 years ago). It is based on the Goldmont Plus (2017) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.1 GHz, with boost up to 2.6 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB. L2 cache: 4 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1090. Thermal design power (TDP): 6 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 1,472 points. Launch price was $107.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the C-60 and Celeron N4000 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 1.33 GHz on the C-60 versus 2.6 GHz on the Celeron N4000 — a 64.6% clock advantage for the Celeron N4000 (base: 1 GHz vs 1.1 GHz). The C-60 uses the Ontario (2011−2012) architecture (40 nm), while the Celeron N4000 uses Goldmont Plus (2017) (14 nm). In PassMark, the C-60 scores 1,483 against the Celeron N4000's 1,472 — a 0.7% lead for the C-60. L3 cache: 0 kB on the C-60 vs 4 MB on the Celeron N4000.

Feature	C-60	Celeron N4000
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	1.33 GHz	2.6 GHz+95%
Base Clock	1 GHz	1.1 GHz+10%
L3 Cache	0 kB	4 MB
L2 Cache	512K (per core)+12700%	4 MB
Process	40 nm	14 nm-65%
Architecture	Ontario (2011−2012)	Goldmont Plus (2017)
PassMark	1,483	1,472

🧠

Memory & Platform

The C-60 uses the FT1 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron N4000 uses FCBGA1090 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	C-60	Celeron N4000
Socket	FT1	FCBGA1090
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 3.0+50%
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1066	—
Max RAM Capacity	4 GB	—
RAM Channels	1	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	4	—

🔧

Advanced Features

The C-60 includes integrated graphics (Radeon HD 6290), while the Celeron N4000 requires a dedicated GPU.

Feature	C-60	Celeron N4000
Integrated GPU	Yes	—
IGPU Model	Radeon HD 6290	—

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the C-60 was priced at $50, while the Celeron N4000 came in at $107. On launch pricing ($50 vs $107), C-60 was $57 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the C-60 delivers 29.7 pts/$ vs 13.8 pts/$ for the Celeron N4000 — making the C-60 the 73.3% better value option.

Feature	C-60	Celeron N4000
MSRP	$50-53%	$107
Performance per Dollar	29.7+115%	13.8
Release Date	2011	2017

Search C-60 on Amazon

Search Celeron N4000 on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.