CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of J1900 vs C2558 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 Celeron J1900 

CPUBoss recommends the Intel Celeron J1900  based on its power consumption.

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 396.2 MB/s More than 143.5x 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
Slightly lower typical power consumption 8.13W vs 12.19W Around 35% lower typical power consumption
Newer Oct, 2013 vs Jul, 2013 Release date 3 months later
Slightly lower annual home energy cost 2.41 $/year vs 3.61 $/year Around 35% lower annual home energy cost
Slightly lower annual commercial energy cost 8.76 $/year vs 13.14 $/year Around 35% lower annual commercial energy cost
Front view of Intel Atom C2558

Reasons to consider the
Intel Atom C2558

Report a correction
Higher clock speed 2.4 GHz vs 2 GHz Around 20% higher clock speed
Better performance per dollar 0.61 pt/$ vs 0.52 pt/$ More than 15% better performance per dollar

Benchmarks Real world tests of Celeron J1900 vs Atom C2558

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 C2558
396.2 MB/s

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Celeron J1900  vs
Atom C2558 
Clock speed 2 GHz 2.4 GHz
Cores Quad core Quad 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 Dual Channel
Supports ECC No Yes
Maximum bandwidth 12,800 MB/s 12,800 MB/s
Maximum memory size 8,192 MB 65,536 MB

details

Celeron J1900  vs
Atom C2558 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 4 4
Manufacture process 22 nm 22 nm
Max CPUs 1 1

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 2.42 GHz 2.4 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 2.42 GHz 2.4 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.42 GHz 2.4 GHz

power consumption

TDP 10W 15W
Annual home energy cost 2.41 $/year 3.61 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 8.76 $/year 13.14 $/year
Performance per watt 4.27 pt/W 4.2 pt/W
Typical power consumption 8.13W 12.19W

bus

Architecture FSB FSB
Number of links 1 1
Intel Celeron J1900
Report a correction
Intel Atom C2558
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus