CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of J1900 vs C2358 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
Intel Atom C2358 

CPUBoss recommends the Intel Atom C2358  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
Front view of Intel Atom C2358

Intel Atom C2358

CPUBoss Winner

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Celeron J1900

Reasons to consider the
Intel Celeron J1900

Report a correction
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 turbo clock speed 2.42 GHz vs 2 GHz More than 20% higher turbo clock speed
Higher clock speed 2 GHz vs 1.7 GHz Around 20% higher clock speed
More cores 4 vs 2 Twice as many cores; run more applications at once
Better overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.42 GHz vs 1.7 GHz More than 40% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
More threads 4 vs 2 Twice as many threads
Better overclocked clock speed (Water) 2.42 GHz vs 1.7 GHz More than 40% better overclocked clock speed (Water)
Newer Oct, 2013 vs Jul, 2013 Release date 3 months later
Front view of Intel Atom C2358

Reasons to consider the
Intel Atom C2358

Report a correction
Better performance per dollar 0.75 pt/$ vs 0.52 pt/$ Around 45% better performance per dollar
Better performance per watt 6.4 pt/W vs 4.27 pt/W Around 50% better performance per watt

Benchmarks Real world tests of Celeron J1900 vs Atom C2358

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Celeron J1900  vs
Atom C2358 
Clock speed 2 GHz 1.7 GHz
Turbo clock speed 2.42 GHz 2 GHz
Cores Quad core Dual core

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
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

memory controller

Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Memory type
DDR3
Channels Dual Channel Single Channel
Supports ECC No Yes
Maximum bandwidth 12,800 MB/s 6,400 MB/s
Maximum memory size 8,192 MB 16,384 MB

details

Celeron J1900  vs
Atom C2358 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 4 2
Manufacture process 22 nm 22 nm
Max CPUs 1 1

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 2.42 GHz 1.7 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 2.42 GHz 1.7 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.42 GHz 1.7 GHz

power consumption

TDP 10W 7W
Annual home energy cost 2.41 $/year 1.69 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 8.76 $/year 6.13 $/year
Performance per watt 4.27 pt/W 6.4 pt/W
Typical power consumption 8.13W 5.69W

bus

Architecture FSB FSB
Number of links 1 1
Intel Celeron J1900
Report a correction
Intel Atom C2358
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus