Celeron J3455E vs Phenom II X4 920

Celeron J3455E vs Phenom II X4 920 Performance Spectrum

Celeron J3455E

4 / 4

2,193

0.0%

2,202

+0.4%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

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.

Celeron J3455E vs Phenom II X4 920 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 J3455E vs Phenom II X4 920: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron J3455E

2019

Why buy it

✅Draws 10W instead of 125W, a 115W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (6 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics 500, while Phenom II X4 920 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (2,193 vs 2,202).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (2 MB vs 6 MB).

Phenom II X4 920

2009

Why buy it

✅+200% larger total L3 cache (6 MB vs 2 MB).

Trade-offs

❌1150% higher power demand at 125W vs 10W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron J3455E can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Phenom II X4 920 better than Celeron J3455E?

Yes. Phenom II X4 920 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 2.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 0.4% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Phenom II X4 920 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 2.3% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Phenom II X4 920 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.4% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 200% larger total L3 cache (6 MB vs 2 MB).

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

Phenom II X4 920 still makes the most sense overall. Phenom II X4 920 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 2.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

Celeron J3455E makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2019 vs 2009). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Celeron J3455E vs Phenom II X4 920 Technical Specifications

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

Celeron J3455E

The Celeron J3455E is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.5 GHz, with boost up to 2.3 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Thermal design power (TDP): 10 Watt. Memory support: DDR3L/LPDDR3 up to 1866 MT/s; LPDDR4 up to 2400 MT/s. Passmark benchmark score: 2,193 points. Launch price was $69.

Phenom II X4 920

The Phenom II X4 920 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 8 January 2009 (16 years ago). It is based on the Deneb (2009−2011) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.8 GHz, with boost up to 2.8 GHz. L3 cache: 6 MB (total). L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: AM3. Thermal design power (TDP): 125 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,202 points. Launch price was $90.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Celeron J3455E and Phenom II X4 920 share an identical 4-core/4-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.3 GHz on the Celeron J3455E versus 2.8 GHz on the Phenom II X4 920 — a 19.6% clock advantage for the Phenom II X4 920 (base: 1.5 GHz vs 2.8 GHz). The Phenom II X4 920 is built on the Deneb (2009−2011) architecture. In PassMark, the Celeron J3455E scores 2,193 against the Phenom II X4 920's 2,202 — a 0.4% lead for the Phenom II X4 920. L3 cache: 2 MB on the Celeron J3455E vs 6 MB (total) on the Phenom II X4 920.

Feature	Celeron J3455E	Phenom II X4 920
Cores / Threads	4 / 4	4 / 4
Boost Clock	2.3 GHz	2.8 GHz+22%
Base Clock	1.5 GHz	2.8 GHz+87%
L3 Cache	2 MB	6 MB (total)+200%
L2 Cache	—	512 kB (per core)
Process	14 nm-69%	45 nm
Architecture	—	Deneb (2009−2011)
PassMark	2,193	2,202
Geekbench 6 Single	450	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	850	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x (Celeron J3455E) / not specified (Phenom II X4 920). The Celeron J3455E includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics 500), while the Phenom II X4 920 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron J3455E targets Low Power. Direct competitor: Celeron J3455E rivals Pentium J4205.