Celeron J4105 vs Core i7-3520M

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 i7-3520M 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 i7-3520M: 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

✅Draws 10W instead of 512W, a 502W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i7-3520M across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (2,820 vs 2,842).

Core i7-3520M

2012

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +4.5% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅166.7% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 6) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $346 MSRP, while Celeron J4105 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌5020% higher power demand at 512W vs 10W.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i7-3520M better than Celeron J4105?

Yes. Core i7-3520M is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 4.5% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 0.8% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Core i7-3520M is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 4.5% 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, Core i7-3520M is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.8% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 4 threads.

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

Core i7-3520M is the better buy right now. Core i7-3520M comes in at an unclear MSRP at $346 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 4.5% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (8.2 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), 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 J4105 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2017 vs 2012). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Celeron J4105 vs Core i7-3520M 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 i7-3520M

The Core i7-3520M is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 3 June 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.9 GHz, with boost up to 3.6 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: PGA988. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,842 points. Launch price was $346.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron J4105 packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Core i7-3520M offers 2 cores / 4 threads — the Celeron J4105 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.5 GHz on the Celeron J4105 versus 3.6 GHz on the Core i7-3520M — a 36.1% clock advantage for the Core i7-3520M (base: 1.5 GHz vs 2.9 GHz). The Celeron J4105 uses the Goldmont Plus (2017) architecture (14 nm), while the Core i7-3520M uses Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron J4105 scores 2,820 against the Core i7-3520M's 2,842 — a 0.8% lead for the Core i7-3520M. L3 cache: 4 MB on the Celeron J4105 vs 4 MB (total) on the Core i7-3520M.

Feature	Celeron J4105	Core i7-3520M
Cores / Threads	4 / 4+100%	2 / 4
Boost Clock	2.5 GHz	3.6 GHz+44%
Base Clock	1.5 GHz	2.9 GHz+93%
L3 Cache	4 MB	4 MB (total)
L2 Cache	4 MB (total)	256K (per core)+6300%
Process	14 nm-36%	22 nm
Architecture	Goldmont Plus (2017)	Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)
PassMark	2,820	2,842

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron J4105 uses the FCBGA1090 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core i7-3520M uses PGA988 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 2400 on the Celeron J4105 versus 1600 on the Core i7-3520M — the Celeron J4105 supports 50% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Core i7-3520M supports up to 32 of RAM compared to 8 — 300% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 6 (Celeron J4105) vs 16 (Core i7-3520M) — the Core i7-3520M offers 10 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: BGA1090 (Celeron J4105) and HM75,HM76,HM77,QM77,QS77 (Core i7-3520M).

Feature	Celeron J4105	Core i7-3520M
Socket	FCBGA1090	PGA988
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	2400+50%	1600
Max RAM Capacity	8	32+300%
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	6	16+167%

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Both support true virtualization. Both include integrated graphics — Intel UHD Graphics 600 (Celeron J4105) and Intel HD Graphics 4000 (Core i7-3520M) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Direct competitor: Celeron J4105 rivals Ryzen Embedded R1305G; Core i7-3520M rivals AMD A10-5750M.