Celeron J3355 vs Core i3-380M

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 J3355 vs Core i3-380M 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 J3355 vs Core i3-380M: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron J3355

2016

Why buy it

✅Draws 10W instead of 35W, a 25W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (850 vs 1,100).

Core i3-380M

2010

Why buy it

✅+29.4% higher Geekbench multi-core.
✅166.7% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 6) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $49 MSRP, while Celeron J3355 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌250% higher power demand at 35W vs 10W.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i3-380M better than Celeron J3355?

Yes. Core i3-380M is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 1.7% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 29.4% better Geekbench multi-core, and 0.7% higher PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

For gaming, this matchup is basically a tie in the data we have.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i3-380M is the stronger fit. You are getting 29.4% better Geekbench multi-core, backed by 2 cores and 4 threads.

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

Core i3-380M is the better buy right now. Core i3-380M comes in at an unclear MSRP at $49 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 1.7% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (24.7 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), 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 J3355 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 J3355 vs Core i3-380M Technical Specifications

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

Celeron J3355

The Celeron J3355 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 30 August 2016 (9 years ago). It is based on the Apollo Lake (2014−2016) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2 GHz, with boost up to 2.5 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1296. Thermal design power (TDP): 10 Watt. Memory support: DDR3, DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 1,203 points. Launch price was $107.

Core i3-380M

The Core i3-380M is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 26 October 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Arrandale (2010−2011) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.53 GHz, with boost up to 0.53 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: PGA988. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,212 points. Launch price was $49.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron J3355 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, matching the Core i3-380M's 2 cores. Boost clocks reach 2.5 GHz on the Celeron J3355 versus 0.53 GHz on the Core i3-380M — a 130% clock advantage for the Celeron J3355 (base: 2 GHz vs 2.53 GHz). The Celeron J3355 uses the Apollo Lake (2014−2016) architecture (14 nm), while the Core i3-380M uses Arrandale (2010−2011) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron J3355 scores 1,203 against the Core i3-380M's 1,212 — a 0.7% lead for the Core i3-380M. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 450 vs 450, a 0% lead for the Core i3-380M that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 850 vs 1,100 (25.6% advantage for the Core i3-380M). L3 cache: 0 kB on the Celeron J3355 vs 3 MB (total) on the Core i3-380M.

Feature	Celeron J3355	Core i3-380M
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 4
Boost Clock	2.5 GHz+372%	0.53 GHz
Base Clock	2 GHz	2.53 GHz+26%
L3 Cache	0 kB	3 MB (total)
L2 Cache	1 MB	256K (per core)+25500%
Process	14 nm-56%	32 nm
Architecture	Apollo Lake (2014−2016)	Arrandale (2010−2011)
PassMark	1,203	1,212
Geekbench 6 Single	450	450
Geekbench 6 Multi	850	1,100+29%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron J3355 uses the FCBGA1296 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core i3-380M uses PGA988 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2400 on the Celeron J3355 versus DDR3-1066 on the Core i3-380M — the Celeron J3355 supports 125.1% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Both support up to 8 GB of RAM. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 6 (Celeron J3355) vs 16 (Core i3-380M) — the Core i3-380M offers 10 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: N/A (SoC) (Celeron J3355) and HM55,HM57,QM57 (Core i3-380M).

Feature	Celeron J3355	Core i3-380M
Socket	FCBGA1296	PGA988
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2400+125%	DDR3-1066
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	8 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	6	16+167%

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Both support VT-x virtualization. Both include integrated graphics — HD Graphics 500 (Celeron J3355) and Intel HD Graphics (Gen 1) (Core i3-380M) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron J3355 targets Low Power, Core i3-380M targets Legacy Laptop. Direct competitor: Celeron J3355 rivals Pentium J4205; Core i3-380M rivals AMD Athlon II P320.