CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of J1800 vs N270 among all CPUs

Performance

Benchmark performance using all cores

PCMark 8 Home 3.0 Accelerated, PassMark and 1 more

Single-core Performance

Individual core benchmark performance

PassMark (Single Core), Geekbench 3 Single Core and 1 more

Integrated Graphics

Integrated GPU performance for graphics

Sky Diver and Cloud Gate

Integrated Graphics (OpenCL)

Integrated GPU performance for parallel computing

CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 4 more

Performance per Watt

How efficiently does the processor use electricity?

Sky Diver, Cloud Gate, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more

Value

Are you paying a premium for performance?

Sky Diver, Cloud Gate, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more

6.9

CPUBoss Score

Combination of all six facets

Winner
Intel Atom N270 

CPUBoss recommends the Intel Atom N270  based on its power consumption and value.

See full details

Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?

Thanks for adding your opinion. Follow us on Facebook to stay up to date with the latest news!
VS

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Celeron J1800

Reasons to consider the
Intel Celeron J1800

Report a correction
Much newer manufacturing process 22 nm vs 45 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Significantly higher clock speed 2.41 GHz vs 1.6 GHz More than 50% higher clock speed
More advanced architecture x86-64 vs x86 A 64-bit architecture allows more RAM to be installed and accessed by the processor
Has a built-in GPU Yes vs No Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required
More l2 cache 1 MB vs 0.5 MB 2x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Has virtualization support Yes vs No Somewhat common; Boosts performance of virtual machines
Newer Oct, 2013 vs Jun, 2008 Release date over 5 years later
Better geekbench 3 Multi-Core score 1,661 vs 516 Around 3.2x better geekbench 3 Multi-Core score
Better overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.58 GHz vs 1.87 GHz Around 40% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
More cores 2 vs 1 Twice as many cores; run more applications at once
Significantly better overclocked clock speed (Water) 2.58 GHz vs 1.6 GHz More than 60% better overclocked clock speed (Water)
Front view of Intel Atom N270

Reasons to consider the
Intel Atom N270

Report a correction
Much better geekbench 3 AES single core score 24,800 MB/s vs 60.6 MB/s Around 409.2x better geekbench 3 AES single core score
Much better performance per watt 9.71 pt/W vs 3.97 pt/W Around 2.5x better performance per watt
Better performance per dollar 0.76 pt/$ vs 0.55 pt/$ More than 35% better performance per dollar
Lower typical power consumption 2.03W vs 8.13W 4x lower typical power consumption
Lower annual commercial energy cost 2.19 $/year vs 8.76 $/year 4x lower annual commercial energy cost
Lower annual home energy cost 0.6 $/year vs 2.41 $/year 4x lower annual home energy cost

Benchmarks Real world tests of Celeron J1800 vs Atom N270

GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Celeron J1800
60.6 MB/s
Atom N270
24,800 MB/s

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Celeron J1800  vs
Atom N270 
Clock speed 2.41 GHz 1.6 GHz
Cores Dual core Single core

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Has virtualization support Yes No
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

integrated graphics

GPU GPU None
Label Intel® HD Graphics N/A
Number of displays supported 2 N/A
GPU clock speed 688 MHz N/A
Turbo clock speed 792 MHz N/A

bus

Architecture FSB FSB
Number of links 1 1

details

Celeron J1800  vs
Atom N270 
Architecture x86-64 x86
Threads 2 2
L2 cache 1 MB 0.5 MB
L2 cache per core 0.5 MB/core 0.5 MB/core
Manufacture process 22 nm 45 nm
Max CPUs 1 1

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 2.58 GHz 1.87 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 2.58 GHz 1.6 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.58 GHz 1.87 GHz

power consumption

TDP 10W 2.5W
Annual home energy cost 2.41 $/year 0.6 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 8.76 $/year 2.19 $/year
Performance per watt 3.97 pt/W 9.71 pt/W
Typical power consumption 8.13W 2.03W
Intel Celeron J1800
Report a correction
Intel Atom N270
Report a correction

Read more

Comments

comments powered by Disqus