Celeron J4025 vs Pentium M 735

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 Pentium M 735 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 Pentium M 735: 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

✅Draws 10W instead of 21W, a 11W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (6 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel UHD Graphics 600, while Pentium M 735 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,450 vs 1,459).

Pentium M 735

2004

Why buy it

✅+0.6% higher PassMark.

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $294 MSRP, while Celeron J4025 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌110% higher power demand at 21W vs 10W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron J4025 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron J4025 better than Pentium M 735?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Celeron J4025 is ahead with a 1.7% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Pentium M 735 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, Pentium M 735 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.6% better PassMark, backed by 1 cores and 1 threads.

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

Celeron J4025 is still the much better call for a fresh build. Celeron J4025 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $294 MSRP, and it still gives you a 1.7% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Pentium M 735 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2004 platform. Even with 100.0% better value on paper (5.0 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on PGA478.

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 2004). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Celeron J4025 vs Pentium M 735 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.

Pentium M 735

The Pentium M 735 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Dothan (2004−2005) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Base frequency is 1.7 GHz, with boost up to 1.7 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 2 MB. Built on 90 nm process technology. Socket: PGA478. Thermal design power (TDP): 7.5 Watt. Memory support: DDR2. Passmark benchmark score: 1,459 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron J4025 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Pentium M 735 offers 1 cores / 1 threads — the Celeron J4025 has 1 more core. Boost clocks reach 2.9 GHz on the Celeron J4025 versus 1.7 GHz on the Pentium M 735 — a 52.2% clock advantage for the Celeron J4025 (base: 2 GHz vs 1.7 GHz). The Celeron J4025 uses the Gemini Lake Refresh (2019) architecture (14 nm), while the Pentium M 735 uses Dothan (2004−2005) (90 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron J4025 scores 1,450 against the Pentium M 735's 1,459 — a 0.6% lead for the Pentium M 735. L3 cache: 4 MB on the Celeron J4025 vs 0 kB on the Pentium M 735.

Feature	Celeron J4025	Pentium M 735
Cores / Threads	2 / 2+100%	1 / 1
Boost Clock	2.9 GHz+71%	1.7 GHz
Base Clock	2 GHz+18%	1.7 GHz
L3 Cache	4 MB	0 kB
L2 Cache	4 MB (total)+100%	2 MB
Process	14 nm-84%	90 nm
Architecture	Gemini Lake Refresh (2019)	Dothan (2004−2005)
PassMark	1,450	1,459

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron J4025 uses the FCBGA1090 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Pentium M 735 uses PGA478 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 2400 on the Celeron J4025 versus DDR-333 on the Pentium M 735 — the Celeron J4025 supports -820.7% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron J4025 supports up to 8 GB of RAM compared to 2 GB — 300% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Celeron J4025) vs 1 (Pentium M 735). PCIe lanes: 6 (Celeron J4025) vs 0 (Pentium M 735) — the Celeron J4025 offers 6 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.

Feature	Celeron J4025	Pentium M 735
Socket	FCBGA1090	PGA478
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+173%	PCIe 1.1
Max RAM Speed	2400	DDR-333
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB+300%	2 GB
RAM Channels	2+100%	1
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	6	0

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: true (Celeron J4025) vs None (Pentium M 735). The Celeron J4025 includes integrated graphics (Intel UHD Graphics 600), while the Pentium M 735 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Pentium M 735 targets Mobile Legacy. Direct competitor: Celeron J4025 rivals Ryzen Embedded R1102G.