Celeron 3965Y vs Celeron J3355

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.

Celeron 3965Y vs Celeron J3355 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.

Celeron 3965Y vs Celeron J3355: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron 3965Y

2017

Why buy it

✅Draws 6W instead of 10W, a 4W reduction.
✅66.7% more PCIe lanes (10 vs 6) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench single-core performance for gaming (372 vs 450).
❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (708 vs 850).

Celeron J3355

2016

Why buy it

✅+21% higher Geekbench single-core performance for gaming and desktop responsiveness.

Trade-offs

❌66.7% higher power demand at 10W vs 6W.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron J3355 better than Celeron 3965Y?

Yes. Celeron J3355 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 2.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 20.1% better Geekbench multi-core, and 0.2% higher PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Celeron J3355 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 2.1% 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, Celeron J3355 is the stronger fit. You are getting 20.1% better Geekbench multi-core, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Celeron J3355 still makes the most sense overall. Celeron J3355 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 2.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

Celeron 3965Y makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2017 vs 2016). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Celeron 3965Y vs Celeron J3355 Technical Specifications

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

Celeron 3965Y

The Celeron 3965Y is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Kaby Lake (2016−2019) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.5 GHz, with boost up to 1.3 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1515. Thermal design power (TDP): 6 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,201 points. Launch price was $69.

Celeron J3355

The Celeron J3355 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 30 August 2016 (9 years ago). It is based on the Apollo Lake (2014−2016) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2 GHz, with boost up to 2.5 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1296. Thermal design power (TDP): 10 Watt. Memory support: DDR3, DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 1,203 points. Launch price was $107.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Celeron 3965Y and Celeron J3355 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 1.3 GHz on the Celeron 3965Y versus 2.5 GHz on the Celeron J3355 — a 63.2% clock advantage for the Celeron J3355 (base: 1.5 GHz vs 2 GHz). The Celeron 3965Y uses the Kaby Lake (2016−2019) architecture (14 nm), while the Celeron J3355 uses Apollo Lake (2014−2016) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron 3965Y scores 1,201 against the Celeron J3355's 1,203 — a 0.2% lead for the Celeron J3355. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 372 vs 450, a 19% lead for the Celeron J3355 that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 708 vs 850 (18.2% advantage for the Celeron J3355). L3 cache: 2 MB on the Celeron 3965Y vs 0 kB on the Celeron J3355.

Feature	Celeron 3965Y	Celeron J3355
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	1.3 GHz	2.5 GHz+92%
Base Clock	1.5 GHz	2 GHz+33%
L3 Cache	2 MB	0 kB
L2 Cache	512 kB	1 MB+100%
Process	14 nm	14 nm
Architecture	Kaby Lake (2016−2019)	Apollo Lake (2014−2016)
PassMark	1,201	1,203
Geekbench 6 Single	372	450+21%
Geekbench 6 Multi	708	850+20%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron 3965Y uses the FCBGA1515 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Celeron J3355 uses FCBGA1296 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches LPDDR3-1866 on the Celeron 3965Y versus DDR4-2400 on the Celeron J3355 — the Celeron J3355 supports 28.6% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron 3965Y 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: 10 (Celeron 3965Y) vs 6 (Celeron J3355) — the Celeron 3965Y offers 4 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: SoC (Celeron 3965Y) and N/A (SoC) (Celeron J3355).

Feature	Celeron 3965Y	Celeron J3355
Socket	FCBGA1515	FCBGA1296
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	LPDDR3-1866	DDR4-2400+29%
Max RAM Capacity	16 GB+100%	8 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	10+67%	6

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Celeron 3965Y) vs VT-x (Celeron J3355). Both include integrated graphics — Intel HD Graphics 615 (Celeron 3965Y) and HD Graphics 500 (Celeron J3355) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron 3965Y targets Low Power, Celeron J3355 targets Low Power. Direct competitor: Celeron 3965Y rivals Pentium Gold 4415Y; Celeron J3355 rivals Pentium J4205.