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 G5925 vs Celeron J4105 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 G5925 vs Celeron J4105: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron G5925

2020

Why buy it

✅166.7% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 6) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (2,808 vs 2,820).
❌Launch MSRP is still $62 MSRP, while Celeron J4105 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌480% higher power demand at 58W vs 10W.

Celeron J4105

2017

Why buy it

✅Draws 10W instead of 58W, a 48W reduction.

Trade-offs

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

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron J4105 better than Celeron G5925?

Yes. Celeron J4105 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 2.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 0.4% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Celeron J4105 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 2.0% 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 J4105 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.4% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads.

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

Celeron J4105 is still the better call for a fresh build. Celeron J4105 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $62 MSRP, and it still gives you a 2.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Celeron G5925 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is so cheap, but its absolute performance tier is too low to be the better recommendation now. At roughly 2,808 PassMark with 2 cores and 2 threads, it only really makes sense as a bare-minimum stopgap or a very constrained existing-platform upgrade.

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

Celeron G5925 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2020 vs 2017). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Celeron G5925 vs Celeron J4105 Technical Specifications

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

Celeron G5925

The Celeron G5925 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency: 3.6 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB Intel® Smart Cache. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1200. Thermal design power (TDP): 58 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2666. Passmark benchmark score: 2,808 points. Launch price was $69.

Celeron J4105

The Celeron J4105 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 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.5 GHz, with boost up to 2.5 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB. L2 cache: 4 MB (total). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1090. Thermal design power (TDP): 10 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 2,820 points. Launch price was $107.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron G5925 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Celeron J4105 offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the Celeron J4105 has 2 more cores. The Celeron J4105 is built on the Goldmont Plus (2017) architecture. In PassMark, the Celeron G5925 scores 2,808 against the Celeron J4105's 2,820 — a 0.4% lead for the Celeron J4105. L3 cache: 4 MB Intel® Smart Cache on the Celeron G5925 vs 4 MB on the Celeron J4105.

Feature	Celeron G5925	Celeron J4105
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	4 / 4+100%
Boost Clock	—	2.5 GHz
Base Clock	3.6 GHz+140%	1.5 GHz
L3 Cache	4 MB Intel® Smart Cache	4 MB
L2 Cache	—	4 MB (total)
Process	14 nm	14 nm
Architecture	—	Goldmont Plus (2017)
PassMark	2,808	2,820
Geekbench 6 Single	756	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	1,248	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron G5925 uses the LGA1200 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Celeron J4105 uses FCBGA1090 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2666 on the Celeron G5925 versus 2400 on the Celeron J4105 — the Celeron G5925 supports 11.1% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron G5925 supports up to 128 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 1500% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 16 (Celeron G5925) vs 6 (Celeron J4105) — the Celeron G5925 offers 10 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H410,B460,H470,Z490,H510,B560,H570,Z590 (Celeron G5925) and BGA1090 (Celeron J4105).

Feature	Celeron G5925	Celeron J4105
Socket	LGA1200	FCBGA1090
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2666+11%	2400
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB+1500%	8 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	Yes	No
PCIe Lanes	16+167%	6

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x (Celeron G5925) vs true (Celeron J4105). Both include integrated graphics — UHD Graphics 610 (Celeron G5925) and Intel UHD Graphics 600 (Celeron J4105) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron G5925 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron G5925 rivals Pentium Gold G6405; Celeron J4105 rivals Ryzen Embedded R1305G.