Celeron J3160 vs Core i3-330E

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 J3160 vs Core i3-330E 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 J3160 vs Core i3-330E: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron J3160

2016

Why buy it

✅Draws 6W instead of 35W, a 29W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (4 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics 400, while Core i3-330E needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,250 vs 1,260).

Core i3-330E

2010

Why buy it

✅+0.8% higher PassMark.

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $177 MSRP, while Celeron J3160 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌483.3% higher power demand at 35W vs 6W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron J3160 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron J3160 better than Core i3-330E?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Celeron J3160 is ahead with a 1.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Core i3-330E pulls ahead with 0.8% better PassMark.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i3-330E is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.8% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 4 threads.

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

Celeron J3160 is the easy recommendation for a fresh desktop build. Celeron J3160 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $177 MSRP, and it still gives you a 1.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i3-330E only looks good on raw value math because it is a cheap legacy laptop chip, not because it is a real desktop gaming recommendation. It simply does not keep up in modern games.

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

Celeron J3160 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2016 vs 2010). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Celeron J3160 vs Core i3-330E Technical Specifications

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

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.

Core i3-330E

The Core i3-330E is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 7 January 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Westmere (2010−2011) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.13 GHz, with boost up to 0.03 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1288. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-800, DDR3-1066. Passmark benchmark score: 1,260 points. Launch price was $177.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron J3160 packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Core i3-330E offers 2 cores / 4 threads — the Celeron J3160 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.24 GHz on the Celeron J3160 versus 0.03 GHz on the Core i3-330E — a 194.7% clock advantage for the Celeron J3160 (base: 1.6 GHz vs 2.13 GHz). The Celeron J3160 uses the Airmont (2016) architecture (14 nm), while the Core i3-330E uses Westmere (2010−2011) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron J3160 scores 1,250 against the Core i3-330E's 1,260 — a 0.8% lead for the Core i3-330E. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Celeron J3160 vs 3 MB on the Core i3-330E.

Feature	Celeron J3160	Core i3-330E
Cores / Threads	4 / 4+100%	2 / 4
Boost Clock	2.24 GHz+7367%	0.03 GHz
Base Clock	1.6 GHz	2.13 GHz+33%
L3 Cache	0 kB	3 MB
L2 Cache	2 MB+300%	512 kB
Process	14 nm-56%	32 nm
Architecture	Airmont (2016)	Westmere (2010−2011)
PassMark	1,250	1,260
Geekbench 6 Single	350	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	650	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron J3160 uses the FCBGA1170 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core i3-330E uses BGA1288 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Celeron J3160	Core i3-330E
Socket	FCBGA1170	BGA1288
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3L-1600	—
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	4	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x (Celeron J3160) / not specified (Core i3-330E). The Celeron J3160 includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics 400), while the Core i3-330E requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron J3160 targets Low Power. Direct competitor: Celeron J3160 rivals Pentium J3710.