Celeron J3455 vs Core i5-2520M

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 J3455 vs Core i5-2520M 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 J3455 vs Core i5-2520M: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron J3455

2016

Why buy it

✅+0.3% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 10W instead of 35W, a 25W reduction.

Trade-offs

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

Core i5-2520M

2011

Why buy it

✅166.7% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 6) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (2,241 vs 2,247).
❌Launch MSRP is still $225 MSRP, while Celeron J3455 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌250% higher power demand at 35W vs 10W.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron J3455 better than Core i5-2520M?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Core i5-2520M is ahead with a 2.9% average FPS lead across 49 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Celeron J3455 pulls ahead with 0.3% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Celeron J3455 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.3% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads.

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

Celeron J3455 is still the much better call for a fresh build. Celeron J3455 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $225 MSRP, and it still gives you 0.3% better PassMark. Core i5-2520M only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2011 platform. Even with 100.0% better value on paper (10.0 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on PGA988.

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

Celeron J3455 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2016 vs 2011) and more multi-core headroom with 4 cores / 4 threads instead of 2/4. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Celeron J3455 vs Core i5-2520M Technical Specifications

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

Celeron J3455

The Celeron J3455 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 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.5 GHz, with boost up to 2.3 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 2 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1296. Thermal design power (TDP): 10 Watt. Memory support: DDR3L/LPDDR3 up to 1866 MT/s; LPDDR4 up to 2400 MT/s. Passmark benchmark score: 2,247 points. Launch price was $107.

Core i5-2520M

The Core i5-2520M is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 February 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.5 GHz, with boost up to 3.2 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: 2,241 points. Launch price was $225.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron J3455 packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Core i5-2520M offers 2 cores / 4 threads — the Celeron J3455 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.3 GHz on the Celeron J3455 versus 3.2 GHz on the Core i5-2520M — a 32.7% clock advantage for the Core i5-2520M (base: 1.5 GHz vs 2.5 GHz). The Celeron J3455 uses the Apollo Lake (2014−2016) architecture (14 nm), while the Core i5-2520M uses Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron J3455 scores 2,247 against the Core i5-2520M's 2,241 — a 0.3% lead for the Celeron J3455. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Celeron J3455 vs 3 MB (total) on the Core i5-2520M.

Feature	Celeron J3455	Core i5-2520M
Cores / Threads	4 / 4+100%	2 / 4
Boost Clock	2.3 GHz	3.2 GHz+39%
Base Clock	1.5 GHz	2.5 GHz+67%
L3 Cache	0 kB	3 MB (total)
L2 Cache	2 MB	256K (per core)+12700%
Process	14 nm-56%	32 nm
Architecture	Apollo Lake (2014−2016)	Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)
PassMark	2,247	2,241
Geekbench 6 Single	450	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	850	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron J3455 uses the FCBGA1296 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core i5-2520M uses PGA988 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2400 on the Celeron J3455 versus 1333 on the Core i5-2520M — the Celeron J3455 supports 80% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Core i5-2520M supports up to 16 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 6 (Celeron J3455) vs 16 (Core i5-2520M) — the Core i5-2520M offers 10 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: N/A (SoC) (Celeron J3455) and HM65,HM67,QM67,QS67 (Core i5-2520M).

Feature	Celeron J3455	Core i5-2520M
Socket	FCBGA1296	PGA988
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2400+80%	1333
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	16 GB+100%
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	6	16+167%

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x (Celeron J3455) vs true (Core i5-2520M). Both include integrated graphics — HD Graphics 500 (Celeron J3455) and Intel HD Graphics 3000 (Core i5-2520M) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron J3455 targets Low Power. Direct competitor: Celeron J3455 rivals Pentium J4205; Core i5-2520M rivals Phenom II Black Edition N660.