Celeron J3355 vs Core i7-680UM

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 i7-680UM 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 i7-680UM: 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

✅+0.6% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 10W instead of 18W, a 8W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (6 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics 500, while Core i7-680UM needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

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

Core i7-680UM

2010

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,196 vs 1,203).
❌80% higher power demand at 18W vs 10W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron J3355 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron J3355 better than Core i7-680UM?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Core i7-680UM is ahead with a 2.4% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Celeron J3355 pulls ahead with 0.6% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Celeron J3355 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.6% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Celeron J3355 still makes the most sense overall. Celeron J3355 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 0.6% better PassMark.

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) and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 2 threads instead of 2/4. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Celeron J3355 vs Core i7-680UM 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 i7-680UM

The Core i7-680UM is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 26 September 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Arrandale (2010−2011) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.46 GHz, with boost up to 2.53 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1288. Thermal design power (TDP): 18 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-800. Passmark benchmark score: 1,196 points. Launch price was $317.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron J3355 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, matching the Core i7-680UM's 2 cores. Boost clocks reach 2.5 GHz on the Celeron J3355 versus 2.53 GHz on the Core i7-680UM — a 1.2% clock advantage for the Core i7-680UM (base: 2 GHz vs 1.46 GHz). The Celeron J3355 uses the Apollo Lake (2014−2016) architecture (14 nm), while the Core i7-680UM uses Arrandale (2010−2011) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron J3355 scores 1,203 against the Core i7-680UM's 1,196 — a 0.6% lead for the Celeron J3355. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Celeron J3355 vs 4 MB (total) on the Core i7-680UM.

Feature	Celeron J3355	Core i7-680UM
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 4
Boost Clock	2.5 GHz	2.53 GHz+1%
Base Clock	2 GHz+37%	1.46 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	4 MB (total)
L2 Cache	1 MB+300%	256 kB (per core)
Process	14 nm-56%	32 nm
Architecture	Apollo Lake (2014−2016)	Arrandale (2010−2011)
PassMark	1,203	1,196
Geekbench 6 Single	450	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	850	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron J3355 uses the FCBGA1296 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core i7-680UM uses BGA1288 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Celeron J3355	Core i7-680UM
Socket	FCBGA1296	BGA1288
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2400	—
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	6	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x (Celeron J3355) / not specified (Core i7-680UM). The Celeron J3355 includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics 500), while the Core i7-680UM requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron J3355 targets Low Power. Direct competitor: Celeron J3355 rivals Pentium J4205.