Celeron J4115 vs FX-4130

Celeron J4115 vs FX-4130 Performance Spectrum

Celeron J4115

4 / 4

2,688

0.0%

2,718

+1.1%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

About PassMark

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 FX-4130 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 FX-4130: 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

✅Draws 4W instead of 125W, a 121W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (6 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel UHD Graphics 600, while FX-4130 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than FX-4130 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (2,688 vs 2,718).

FX-4130

2012

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +7.7% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $100 MSRP, while Celeron J4115 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌3025% higher power demand at 125W vs 4W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron J4115 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is FX-4130 better than Celeron J4115?

Yes. FX-4130 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 7.7% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 1.1% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, FX-4130 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 7.7% 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, FX-4130 is the stronger fit. You are getting 1.1% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads.

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

FX-4130 is the better buy right now. FX-4130 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $100 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 7.7% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (27.2 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), 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 J4115 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2019 vs 2012). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Celeron J4115 vs FX-4130 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.

FX-4130

The FX-4130 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 27 August 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Zambezi (2011−2012) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3.8 GHz, with boost up to 3.9 GHz. L2 cache: 4096 kB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: AM3+. Thermal design power (TDP): 125 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,718 points. Launch price was $112.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Celeron J4115 and FX-4130 share an identical 4-core/4-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.5 GHz on the Celeron J4115 versus 3.9 GHz on the FX-4130 — a 43.7% clock advantage for the FX-4130 (base: 1.8 GHz vs 3.8 GHz). The Celeron J4115 uses the Gemini Lake (2019) architecture (14 nm), while the FX-4130 uses Zambezi (2011−2012) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron J4115 scores 2,688 against the FX-4130's 2,718 — a 1.1% lead for the FX-4130.

Feature	Celeron J4115	FX-4130
Cores / Threads	4 / 4	4 / 4
Boost Clock	2.5 GHz	3.9 GHz+56%
Base Clock	1.8 GHz	3.8 GHz+111%
L3 Cache	4 MB	—
L2 Cache	4 MB	4096 kB
Process	14 nm-56%	32 nm
Architecture	Gemini Lake (2019)	Zambezi (2011−2012)
PassMark	2,688	2,718+1%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron J4115 uses the FCBGA1090 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the FX-4130 uses AM3+ (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Celeron J4115	FX-4130
Socket	FCBGA1090	AM3+
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	2400	—
Max RAM Capacity	8	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	6	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: true (Celeron J4115) / not specified (FX-4130). The Celeron J4115 includes integrated graphics (Intel UHD Graphics 600), while the FX-4130 requires a dedicated GPU. Direct competitor: Celeron J4115 rivals Ryzen Embedded R1305G.