Celeron G555 vs Turion II Neo K685

Celeron G555 vs Turion II Neo K685 Performance Spectrum

Celeron G555

2 / 2

1,427

+0.2%

1,424

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

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.

Celeron G555 vs Turion II Neo K685 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 G555 vs Turion II Neo K685: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron G555

2012

Why buy it

✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge), while Turion II Neo K685 needs a discrete GPU.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Intel Stock), unlike Turion II Neo K685.

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $52 MSRP, while Turion II Neo K685 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌6400% higher power demand at 65W vs 1W.

Turion II Neo K685

2010

Why buy it

✅Draws 1W instead of 65W, a 64W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,424 vs 1,427).
❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron G555 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Celeron G555.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron G555 better than Turion II Neo K685?

Yes. Celeron G555 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 1.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 0.2% 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, Celeron G555 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 1.6% 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 G555 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.2% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Celeron G555 is the better buy right now. Celeron G555 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $52 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 1.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (27.4 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Celeron G555 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2012 vs 2010) and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 2 threads instead of 2/2. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Celeron G555 vs Turion II Neo K685 Technical Specifications

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

Celeron G555

The Celeron G555 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 September 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.7 GHz, with boost up to 2.7 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1155. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,427 points. Launch price was $89.

Turion II Neo K685

The Turion II Neo K685 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Geneva (2010) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.8 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: S1g4. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,424 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Celeron G555 and Turion II Neo K685 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.7 GHz on the Celeron G555 versus 1.8 GHz on the Turion II Neo K685 — a 40% clock advantage for the Celeron G555. The Celeron G555 uses the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture (32 nm), while the Turion II Neo K685 uses Geneva (2010) (45 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron G555 scores 1,427 against the Turion II Neo K685's 1,424 — a 0.2% lead for the Celeron G555.

Feature	Celeron G555	Turion II Neo K685
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	2.7 GHz+50%	1.8 GHz
Base Clock	2.7 GHz	—
L3 Cache	2 MB (total)	—
L2 Cache	256 kB (per core)	1 MB+300%
Process	32 nm-29%	45 nm
Architecture	Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)	Geneva (2010)
PassMark	1,427	1,424
Geekbench 6 Single	398	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	742	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron G555 uses the LGA1155 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Turion II Neo K685 uses S1g4 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Celeron G555	Turion II Neo K685
Socket	LGA1155	S1g4
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1333	—
Max RAM Capacity	32 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	16	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x (Celeron G555) / not specified (Turion II Neo K685). The Celeron G555 includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)), while the Turion II Neo K685 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron G555 targets Desktop. Direct competitor: Celeron G555 rivals Pentium G630.