Celeron J4025 vs Core 2 Solo SU3500

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 J4025 vs Core 2 Solo SU3500 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 J4025 vs Core 2 Solo SU3500: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron J4025

2019

Why buy it

✅+33.3% larger total L3 cache (4 MB vs 3 MB).
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (6 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel UHD Graphics 600, while Core 2 Solo SU3500 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,450 vs 1,468).
❌233.3% higher power demand at 10W vs 3W.

Core 2 Solo SU3500

2009

Why buy it

✅+1.2% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 3W instead of 10W, a 7W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (3 MB vs 4 MB).
❌Launch MSRP is still $262 MSRP, while Celeron J4025 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron J4025 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Core 2 Solo SU3500 better than Celeron J4025?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Celeron J4025 is ahead with a 1.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Core 2 Solo SU3500 pulls ahead with 1.2% better PassMark. Celeron J4025 also has the bigger cache pool with 33.3% larger total L3 cache (4 MB vs 3 MB).

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core 2 Solo SU3500 is the stronger fit. You are getting 1.2% better PassMark, backed by 1 cores and 1 threads.

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

Core 2 Solo SU3500 is the better buy right now. Core 2 Solo SU3500 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $262 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 1.2% better PassMark. The compromise is that Celeron J4025 is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 1.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (5.6 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), 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 J4025 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2019 vs 2009) and 33.3% larger total L3 cache (4 MB vs 3 MB). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Celeron J4025 vs Core 2 Solo SU3500 Technical Specifications

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

Celeron J4025

The Celeron J4025 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 4 November 2019 (6 years ago). It is based on the Gemini Lake Refresh (2019) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2 GHz, with boost up to 2.9 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB. L2 cache: 4 MB (total). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1090. Thermal design power (TDP): 10 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 1,450 points. Launch price was $107.

Core 2 Solo SU3500

The Core 2 Solo SU3500 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 April 2009 (16 years ago). It is based on the Penryn (2008−2011) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Base frequency is 1.3 GHz, with boost up to 1.4 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB. L2 cache: 3 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: BGA956. Thermal design power (TDP): 5.5 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 1,468 points. Launch price was $262.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron J4025 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Core 2 Solo SU3500 offers 1 cores / 1 threads — the Celeron J4025 has 1 more core. Boost clocks reach 2.9 GHz on the Celeron J4025 versus 1.4 GHz on the Core 2 Solo SU3500 — a 69.8% clock advantage for the Celeron J4025 (base: 2 GHz vs 1.3 GHz). The Celeron J4025 uses the Gemini Lake Refresh (2019) architecture (14 nm), while the Core 2 Solo SU3500 uses Penryn (2008−2011) (45 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron J4025 scores 1,450 against the Core 2 Solo SU3500's 1,468 — a 1.2% lead for the Core 2 Solo SU3500. L3 cache: 4 MB on the Celeron J4025 vs 3 MB on the Core 2 Solo SU3500.

Feature	Celeron J4025	Core 2 Solo SU3500
Cores / Threads	2 / 2+100%	1 / 1
Boost Clock	2.9 GHz+107%	1.4 GHz
Base Clock	2 GHz+54%	1.3 GHz
L3 Cache	4 MB+33%	3 MB
L2 Cache	4 MB (total)+33%	3 MB
Process	14 nm-69%	45 nm
Architecture	Gemini Lake Refresh (2019)	Penryn (2008−2011)
PassMark	1,450	1,468+1%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron J4025 uses the FCBGA1090 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core 2 Solo SU3500 uses BGA956 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Celeron J4025	Core 2 Solo SU3500
Socket	FCBGA1090	BGA956
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+173%	PCIe 1.1
Max RAM Speed	2400	—
Max RAM Capacity	8	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	6	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: true (Celeron J4025) / not specified (Core 2 Solo SU3500). The Celeron J4025 includes integrated graphics (Intel UHD Graphics 600), while the Core 2 Solo SU3500 requires a dedicated GPU. Direct competitor: Celeron J4025 rivals Ryzen Embedded R1102G.