CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of J1900 vs 605e 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

7.5

CPUBoss Score

Combination of all six facets

Winner
AMD Athlon II X4 605e 

CPUBoss recommends the AMD Athlon II X4 605e  based on its performance and single-core performance.

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 J1900

Reasons to consider the
Intel Celeron J1900

Report a correction
Much lower typical power consumption 8.13W vs 130.78W 16.1x lower typical power consumption
Much newer manufacturing process 22 nm vs 45 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Has a built-in GPU Yes vs No Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required
Much lower annual home energy cost 2.41 $/year vs 53.03 $/year 22x lower annual home energy cost
Significantly better performance per watt 4.27 pt/W vs 0.64 pt/W Around 6.8x better performance per watt
Much lower annual commercial energy cost 8.76 $/year vs 120.63 $/year 13.8x lower annual commercial energy cost
Newer Oct, 2013 vs Oct, 2009 Release date over 4 years later
Front view of AMD Athlon II X4 605e

Reasons to consider the
AMD Athlon II X4 605e

Report a correction
Higher clock speed 2.3 GHz vs 2 GHz Around 15% higher clock speed
Better geekbench 3 Multi-Core score 4,672 vs 2,927 Around 60% better geekbench 3 Multi-Core score
Significantly better overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.36 GHz vs 2.42 GHz Around 40% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Better geekbench 3 single core score 1,382 vs 924 Around 50% better geekbench 3 single core score

Benchmarks Real world tests of Celeron J1900 vs Athlon II X4 605e

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 J1900
56,900 MB/s
Athlon II X4 605e
105.8 MB/s

Cinebench R10 32-Bit

Cinebench R10 32-Bit (Single Core)

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Celeron J1900  vs
Athlon II X4 605e 
Clock speed 2 GHz 2.3 GHz
Cores Quad core Quad core

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
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 854 MHz N/A

details

Celeron J1900  vs
Athlon II X4 605e 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 4 4
L2 cache 2 MB 2 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 2.42 GHz 3.36 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 2.42 GHz 2.3 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.42 GHz 3.36 GHz

power consumption

TDP 10W 45W
Annual home energy cost 2.41 $/year 53.03 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 8.76 $/year 120.63 $/year
Performance per watt 4.27 pt/W 0.64 pt/W
Typical power consumption 8.13W 130.78W
Intel Celeron J1900
Report a correction
AMD Athlon II X4 605e
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus