Celeron J3160 vs Athlon II X2 260
Celeron J3160
Athlon II X2 260
Performance Spectrum - CPU
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.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (PassMark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The Celeron J3160 is positioned at rank 485 and the Athlon II X2 260 is on rank 780, so the Celeron J3160 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Celeron J3160
Performance Per Dollar Athlon II X2 260
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Celeron J3160 | Athlon II X2 260 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ❌ Lower gaming performance | ✅ Superior gaming performance |
| Workstation | ✅ Better multi-core power | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks |
| Price | ✅ More affordable ($0) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($12) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Airmont (2016) / 14 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Regor (2009−2013) / 45 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Celeron J3160 | Athlon II X2 260 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅ More affordable ($0) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($12) |
Performance Check
To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.
Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Celeron J3160 and Athlon II X2 260
Celeron J3160
The Celeron J3160 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 15 January 2016 (9 years ago). It is based on the Airmont (2016) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.6 GHz, with boost up to 2.24 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 2 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1170. Thermal design power (TDP): 6 Watt. Memory support: DDR3L-1600. Passmark benchmark score: 1,250 points. Launch price was $107.
Athlon II X2 260
The Athlon II X2 260 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 11 May 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Regor (2009−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 3.2 GHz, with boost up to 3.2 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: AM3. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,248 points. Launch price was $48.
Processing Power
The Celeron J3160 packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Athlon II X2 260 offers 2 cores / 2 threads — the Celeron J3160 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.24 GHz on the Celeron J3160 versus 3.2 GHz on the Athlon II X2 260 — a 35.3% clock advantage for the Athlon II X2 260 (base: 1.6 GHz vs 3.2 GHz). The Celeron J3160 uses the Airmont (2016) architecture (14 nm), while the Athlon II X2 260 uses Regor (2009−2013) (45 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron J3160 scores 1,250 against the Athlon II X2 260's 1,248 — a 0.2% lead for the Celeron J3160. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.
| Feature | Celeron J3160 | Athlon II X2 260 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 4 / 4+100% | 2 / 2 |
| Boost Clock | 2.24 GHz | 3.2 GHz+43% |
| Base Clock | 1.6 GHz | 3.2 GHz+100% |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+100% | 1 MB |
| Process | 14 nm-69% | 45 nm |
| Architecture | Airmont (2016) | Regor (2009−2013) |
| PassMark | 1,250 | 1,248 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 350 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 650 | — |
Memory & Platform
The Celeron J3160 uses the FCBGA1170 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Athlon II X2 260 uses AM3 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3L-1600 on the Celeron J3160 versus 1333 on the Athlon II X2 260 — the Athlon II X2 260 supports 199.1% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Athlon II X2 260 supports up to 16 of RAM compared to 8 GB — 66.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 4 (Celeron J3160) vs 0 (Athlon II X2 260) — the Celeron J3160 offers 4 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: N/A (SoC) (Celeron J3160) and AM2+,AM3 (Athlon II X2 260).
| Feature | Celeron J3160 | Athlon II X2 260 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | FCBGA1170 | AM3 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0+50% | PCIe 2.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR3L-1600 | 1333+44333% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 8 GB+52428700% | 16 |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 4 | 0 |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x (Celeron J3160) vs true (Athlon II X2 260). The Celeron J3160 includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics 400), while the Athlon II X2 260 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron J3160 targets Low Power. Direct competitor: Celeron J3160 rivals Pentium J3710; Athlon II X2 260 rivals Pentium E6700.
| Feature | Celeron J3160 | Athlon II X2 260 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | No |
| IGPU Model | HD Graphics 400 | None |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | VT-x | true |
| Target Use | Low Power | — |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Celeron J3160 and Athlon II X2 260
