Celeron J4115 vs Core i3-4110M

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 J4115 vs Core i3-4110M 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 J4115 vs Core i3-4110M: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron J4115

2019

Why buy it

✅+0.4% higher PassMark.
✅+33.3% larger total L3 cache (4 MB vs 3 MB).
✅Draws 4W instead of 512W, a 508W reduction.

Trade-offs

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

Core i3-4110M

2014

Why buy it

✅166.7% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 6) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (2,678 vs 2,688).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (3 MB vs 4 MB).
❌12700% higher power demand at 512W vs 4W.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron J4115 better than Core i3-4110M?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Core i3-4110M is ahead with a 0.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Celeron J4115 pulls ahead with 0.4% better PassMark. Celeron J4115 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, Celeron J4115 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.4% 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 J4115 still makes the most sense overall. Celeron J4115 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 0.4% better PassMark.

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

Celeron J4115 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2019 vs 2014), 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 J4115 vs Core i3-4110M Technical Specifications

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

Celeron J4115

The Celeron J4115 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Gemini Lake (2019) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.8 GHz, with boost up to 2.5 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB. L2 cache: 4 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1090. Thermal design power (TDP): 10 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 2,688 points. Launch price was $69.

Core i3-4110M

The Core i3-4110M is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 14 April 2014 (11 years ago). It is based on the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.6 GHz, with boost up to 2.6 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: PGA946. Thermal design power (TDP): 37 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,678 points. Launch price was $225.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron J4115 packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Core i3-4110M offers 2 cores / 4 threads — the Celeron J4115 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.5 GHz on the Celeron J4115 versus 2.6 GHz on the Core i3-4110M — a 3.9% clock advantage for the Core i3-4110M (base: 1.8 GHz vs 2.6 GHz). The Celeron J4115 uses the Gemini Lake (2019) architecture (14 nm), while the Core i3-4110M uses Haswell (2013−2015) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron J4115 scores 2,688 against the Core i3-4110M's 2,678 — a 0.4% lead for the Celeron J4115. L3 cache: 4 MB on the Celeron J4115 vs 3 MB on the Core i3-4110M.

Feature	Celeron J4115	Core i3-4110M
Cores / Threads	4 / 4+100%	2 / 4
Boost Clock	2.5 GHz	2.6 GHz+4%
Base Clock	1.8 GHz	2.6 GHz+44%
L3 Cache	4 MB+33%	3 MB
L2 Cache	4 MB+700%	512 kB
Process	14 nm-36%	22 nm
Architecture	Gemini Lake (2019)	Haswell (2013−2015)
PassMark	2,688	2,678

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron J4115 uses the FCBGA1090 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core i3-4110M uses PGA946 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 2400 on the Celeron J4115 versus DDR3L-1600 on the Core i3-4110M — the Celeron J4115 supports 50% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Core i3-4110M 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 J4115) vs 16 (Core i3-4110M) — the Core i3-4110M offers 10 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.

Feature	Celeron J4115	Core i3-4110M
Socket	FCBGA1090	PGA946
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	2400+50%	DDR3L-1600
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	32 GB+300%
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	6	16+167%

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: true (Celeron J4115) vs VT-x, VT-d (Core i3-4110M). Both include integrated graphics — Intel UHD Graphics 600 (Celeron J4115) and HD Graphics 4600 (Core i3-4110M) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i3-4110M targets Mobile. Direct competitor: Celeron J4115 rivals Ryzen Embedded R1305G.