Celeron J4105 vs Core i3-6157U

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 J4105 vs Core i3-6157U 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 J4105 vs Core i3-6157U: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron J4105

2017

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 i3-6157U

2016

Why buy it

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

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (2,782 vs 2,820).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (3 MB vs 4 MB).
❌5020% higher power demand at 512W vs 10W.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron J4105 better than Core i3-6157U?

Yes. Celeron J4105 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 0.4% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 1.4% 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 J4105 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 0.4% 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, Celeron J4105 is the stronger fit. You are getting 1.4% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 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 J4105 still makes the most sense overall. Celeron J4105 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 0.4% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

Celeron J4105 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2017 vs 2016), 33.3% larger total L3 cache (4 MB vs 3 MB), 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 J4105 vs Core i3-6157U Technical Specifications

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

Celeron J4105

The Celeron J4105 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 11 December 2017 (7 years ago). It is based on the Goldmont Plus (2017) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.5 GHz, with boost up to 2.5 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: 2,820 points. Launch price was $107.

Core i3-6157U

The Core i3-6157U is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 September 2016 (9 years ago). It is based on the Skylake (2015−2016) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.4 GHz, with boost up to 2.4 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1356. Thermal design power (TDP): 28 Watt. Memory support: DDR3, DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 2,782 points. Launch price was $304.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron J4105 packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Core i3-6157U offers 2 cores / 4 threads — the Celeron J4105 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.5 GHz on the Celeron J4105 versus 2.4 GHz on the Core i3-6157U — a 4.1% clock advantage for the Celeron J4105 (base: 1.5 GHz vs 2.4 GHz). The Celeron J4105 uses the Goldmont Plus (2017) architecture (14 nm), while the Core i3-6157U uses Skylake (2015−2016) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron J4105 scores 2,820 against the Core i3-6157U's 2,782 — a 1.4% lead for the Celeron J4105. L3 cache: 4 MB on the Celeron J4105 vs 3 MB on the Core i3-6157U.

Feature	Celeron J4105	Core i3-6157U
Cores / Threads	4 / 4+100%	2 / 4
Boost Clock	2.5 GHz+4%	2.4 GHz
Base Clock	1.5 GHz	2.4 GHz+60%
L3 Cache	4 MB+33%	3 MB
L2 Cache	4 MB (total)+700%	512 kB
Process	14 nm	14 nm
Architecture	Goldmont Plus (2017)	Skylake (2015−2016)
PassMark	2,820+1%	2,782

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron J4105 uses the FCBGA1090 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core i3-6157U uses BGA1356 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 2400 on the Celeron J4105 versus DDR4-2133 on the Core i3-6157U — the Celeron J4105 supports 12.5% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Core i3-6157U supports up to 32 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 300% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 6 (Celeron J4105) vs 12 (Core i3-6157U) — the Core i3-6157U offers 6 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.

Feature	Celeron J4105	Core i3-6157U
Socket	FCBGA1090	BGA1356
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	2400+13%	DDR4-2133
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	32 GB+300%
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	6	12+100%

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: true (Celeron J4105) vs VT-x, VT-d (Core i3-6157U). Both include integrated graphics — Intel UHD Graphics 600 (Celeron J4105) and Iris Graphics 550 (Core i3-6157U) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i3-6157U targets Mobile. Direct competitor: Celeron J4105 rivals Ryzen Embedded R1305G.