Celeron J3060 vs E1-6010

Celeron J3060 vs E1-6010 Performance Spectrum

Celeron J3060

2 / 2

1,015

+0.9%

1,006

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 J3060 vs E1-6010 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 J3060 vs E1-6010: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron J3060

2016

Why buy it

✅Draws 6W instead of 10W, a 4W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (4 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel HD Graphics 400, while E1-6010 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

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

E1-6010

2014

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,006 vs 1,015).
❌66.7% higher power demand at 10W vs 6W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron J3060 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron J3060 better than E1-6010?

Yes. Celeron J3060 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 0.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 0.9% 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 J3060 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 0.2% 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 J3060 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.9% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Celeron J3060 still makes the most sense overall. Celeron J3060 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 0.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

Celeron J3060 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2016 vs 2014) 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 J3060 vs E1-6010 Technical Specifications

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

Celeron J3060

The Celeron J3060 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 15 January 2016 (9 years ago). It is based on the Airmont (2016) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.6 GHz, with boost up to 2.48 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1170. Thermal design power (TDP): 6 Watt. Memory support: DDR3L-1600. Passmark benchmark score: 1,015 points. Launch price was $107.

E1-6010

The E1-6010 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Beema (2014) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.35 GHz. L2 cache: 1024 kB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: FT3. Thermal design power (TDP): 10 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,006 points. Launch price was $50.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Celeron J3060 and E1-6010 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.48 GHz on the Celeron J3060 versus 1.35 GHz on the E1-6010 — a 59% clock advantage for the Celeron J3060. The Celeron J3060 uses the Airmont (2016) architecture (14 nm), while the E1-6010 uses Beema (2014) (28 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron J3060 scores 1,015 against the E1-6010's 1,006 — a 0.9% lead for the Celeron J3060.

Feature	Celeron J3060	E1-6010
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	2.48 GHz+84%	1.35 GHz
Base Clock	1.6 GHz	—
L3 Cache	0 kB	—
L2 Cache	1 MB	1024 kB
Process	14 nm-50%	28 nm
Architecture	Airmont (2016)	Beema (2014)
PassMark	1,015	1,006
Geekbench 6 Single	200	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	370	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron J3060 uses the FCBGA1170 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the E1-6010 uses FT3 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Celeron J3060	E1-6010
Socket	FCBGA1170	FT3
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3L-1600	—
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	4	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x, EPT (Celeron J3060) / not specified (E1-6010). The Celeron J3060 includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics 400), while the E1-6010 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron J3060 targets Low Power Desktop/NAS. Direct competitor: Celeron J3060 rivals Pentium J3710.