Celeron J4025 vs Core i3-4020Y

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 i3-4020Y 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 i3-4020Y: 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).
✅Draws 10W instead of 512W, a 502W reduction.

Trade-offs

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

Core i3-4020Y

2013

Why buy it

✅100% more PCIe lanes (12 vs 6) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,448 vs 1,450).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (3 MB vs 4 MB).
❌5020% higher power demand at 512W vs 10W.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron J4025 better than Core i3-4020Y?

Yes. Celeron J4025 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you 0.1% better PassMark and the stronger long-term platform, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Celeron J4025 has the edge because it leads the single-thread side of this matchup with 93.3% higher max boost clock.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Celeron J4025 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.1% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 33.3% larger total L3 cache (4 MB vs 3 MB).

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

Celeron J4025 still makes the most sense overall. Celeron J4025 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 0.1% higher PassMark.

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 2013), 33.3% larger total L3 cache (4 MB vs 3 MB), 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 J4025 vs Core i3-4020Y 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 i3-4020Y

The Core i3-4020Y is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 September 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.5 GHz, with boost up to 1.5 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1168. Thermal design power (TDP): 11.5 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,448 points. Launch price was $304.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron J4025 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, matching the Core i3-4020Y's 2 cores. Boost clocks reach 2.9 GHz on the Celeron J4025 versus 1.5 GHz on the Core i3-4020Y — a 63.6% clock advantage for the Celeron J4025 (base: 2 GHz vs 1.5 GHz). The Celeron J4025 uses the Gemini Lake Refresh (2019) architecture (14 nm), while the Core i3-4020Y uses Haswell (2013−2015) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron J4025 scores 1,450 against the Core i3-4020Y's 1,448 — a 0.1% lead for the Celeron J4025. L3 cache: 4 MB on the Celeron J4025 vs 3 MB on the Core i3-4020Y.

Feature	Celeron J4025	Core i3-4020Y
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 4
Boost Clock	2.9 GHz+93%	1.5 GHz
Base Clock	2 GHz+33%	1.5 GHz
L3 Cache	4 MB+33%	3 MB
L2 Cache	4 MB (total)+700%	512 kB
Process	14 nm-36%	22 nm
Architecture	Gemini Lake Refresh (2019)	Haswell (2013−2015)
PassMark	1,450	1,448

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron J4025 uses the FCBGA1090 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core i3-4020Y uses FCBGA1168 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 2400 on the Celeron J4025 versus 1600 on the Core i3-4020Y — the Celeron J4025 supports 50% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Core i3-4020Y supports up to 16 of RAM compared to 8 — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 6 (Celeron J4025) vs 12 (Core i3-4020Y) — the Core i3-4020Y offers 6 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: BGA1090 (Celeron J4025) and BGA1168 (Core i3-4020Y).

Feature	Celeron J4025	Core i3-4020Y
Socket	FCBGA1090	FCBGA1168
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	2400+50%	1600
Max RAM Capacity	8	16+100%
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	6	12+100%

🔧

Advanced Features

Both support true virtualization. Both include integrated graphics — Intel UHD Graphics 600 (Celeron J4025) and Intel HD Graphics 4200 (Core i3-4020Y) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Direct competitor: Celeron J4025 rivals Ryzen Embedded R1102G.