Winner
Intel Celeron J1900
CPUBoss recommends the Intel Celeron J1900 based on its power consumption and value.
See full details Intel Celeron J1900 vs Atom C2518 |
Released October, 2013
Intel Celeron J1900
- 2 GHz
- Quad core
7.5 Out of 10
Reasons to buy the Intel Celeron J1900
 | Much better geekbench 3 AES single core score 56,900 MB/s | | Has a built-in GPU Yes |
| | Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes | | Higher clock speed 2 GHz |
VS
CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of J1900 vs C2518 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 |
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?
VS
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
| Much better geekbench 3 AES single core score | 56,900 MB/s | vs | 289.5 MB/s | More than 196.5x better geekbench 3 AES single core score | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 1.7 GHz | Around 20% higher clock speed | |||
| Better geekbench 3 Multi-Core score | 2,927 | vs | 2,369 | Around 25% better geekbench 3 Multi-Core score | |||
| Better performance per watt | 4.27 pt/W | vs | 3.24 pt/W | More than 30% better performance per watt | |||
| Slightly better performance per dollar | 0.52 pt/$ | vs | 0.46 pt/$ | More than 10% better performance per dollar | |||
| Newer | Oct, 2013 | vs | Jul, 2013 | Release date 3 months later | |||
| |||||||
| CPUBoss is not aware of any important advantages of the Atom C2518 vs the Celeron J1900. | |||||||
Report a correction
Benchmarks Real world tests of Celeron J1900 vs Atom C2518
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
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | Celeron J1900 | vs | Atom C2518 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clock speed | 2 GHz | 1.7 GHz | |
| Cores | Quad core | Quad core | |
features | |||
| Has a NX bit | Yes | Yes | |
| Has virtualization support | Yes | Yes | |
| Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes | No | |
power consumption | |||
| TDP | 10W | 13W | |
| Annual home energy cost | 2.41 $/year | 3.13 $/year | |
| Annual commercial energy cost | 8.76 $/year | 11.39 $/year | |
| Performance per watt | 4.27 pt/W | 3.24 pt/W | |
| Typical power consumption | 8.13W | 10.56W | |
bus | |||
| Architecture | FSB | FSB | |
| Number of links | 1 | 1 | |
details | Celeron J1900 | vs | Atom C2518 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Architecture | x86-64 | x86-64 | |
| Threads | 4 | 4 | |
| Manufacture process | 22 nm | 22 nm | |
| Max CPUs | 1 | 1 | |
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 | Dual Channel | |
| Supports ECC | No | Yes | |
| Maximum bandwidth | 12,800 MB/s | 12,800 MB/s | |
| Maximum memory size | 8,192 MB | 32,768 MB | |
 Intel Celeron J1900  Report a correction |  Intel Atom C2518 Report a correction |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $82 | $125 | |
| J1900 vs 3220 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $82 | $107 | |
| J1900 vs N3150 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $82 | $72 | |
| J1900 vs J1800 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $82 | $94 | |
| J1900 vs J2900 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $82 | $75 | |
| J1900 vs 1037U | ||
| | VS |  |
| $82 | ||
| J1900 vs J3455 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $82 | $75 | |
| J1900 vs 1007U | ||
Popular Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $305 | $300 | |
| W3520 vs 2500 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $272 | $350 | |
| 4790K vs 6700K | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| 4200U vs 6410 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| 6200U vs 7th Gen A9-9410 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $275 | $161 | |
| 4005U vs N3540 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $134 | $225 | |
| 847 vs 3217U | ||
 | VS | |
| $250 | $350 | |
| 6600K vs 6700K | ||
