CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of J1900 vs 330 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

Atom 330
0.0
J3455
n.d.
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?

Atom 330
n.d.
J3455
n.d.
Sky Diver, Cloud Gate, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more

7.7

CPUBoss Score

Combination of all six facets

Winner
Intel Celeron J1900 

CPUBoss recommends the Intel Celeron J1900  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

Intel Celeron J1900

CPUBoss Winner
Front view of Intel Celeron J1900

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Celeron J1900

Reasons to consider the
Intel Celeron J1900

Report a correction
Much better geekbench 3 AES single core score 56,900 MB/s vs 25,200 MB/s More than 2.2x better geekbench 3 AES single core score
Much better geekbench 2 (32-bit) score 2,887 vs 873 More than 3.2x better geekbench 2 (32-bit) score
Much newer manufacturing process 22 nm vs 45 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Significantly more l2 cache 2 MB vs 1 MB 2x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Has a built-in GPU Yes vs No Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes vs No Somewhat common; Allows for maximum performance when needed, while conserving power and minimizing heat production when not needed
Higher clock speed 2 GHz vs 1.6 GHz Around 25% higher clock speed
Has virtualization support Yes vs No Somewhat common; Boosts performance of virtual machines
Newer Oct, 2013 vs Sep, 2008 Release date over 5 years later
More cores 4 vs 2 Twice as many cores; run more applications at once
Better overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.42 GHz vs 2.05 GHz Around 20% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Better PassMark score 1,863 vs 592 Around 3.2x better PassMark score
Significantly better overclocked clock speed (Water) 2.42 GHz vs 1.6 GHz More than 50% better overclocked clock speed (Water)
Front view of Intel Atom 330

Reasons to consider the
Intel Atom 330

Report a correction
Better performance per dollar 0.7 pt/$ vs 0.52 pt/$ Around 35% better performance per dollar

Benchmarks Real world tests of Celeron J1900 vs Atom 330

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
Atom 330
25,200 MB/s

GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench

Cinebench R10 32-Bit

Atom 330
1,908

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Celeron J1900  vs
Atom 330 
Clock speed 2 GHz 1.6 GHz
Cores Quad core Dual core

features

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

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

bus

Architecture FSB FSB
Number of links 1 1

details

Celeron J1900  vs
Atom 330 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 4 4
L2 cache 2 MB 1 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 2.05 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 2.42 GHz 1.6 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.42 GHz 2.05 GHz

power consumption

TDP 10W 8W
Annual home energy cost 2.41 $/year 1.93 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 8.76 $/year 7.01 $/year
Performance per watt 4.27 pt/W 3.77 pt/W
Typical power consumption 8.13W 6.5W
Intel Celeron J1900
Report a correction
Intel Atom 330
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus