CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of J1900 vs E3827 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

7.9

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
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
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 1.75 GHz Around 15% higher clock speed
Higher GPU clock speed 688 MHz vs 542 MHz More than 25% higher GPU clock speed
More cores 4 vs 2 Twice as many cores; run more applications at once
Better turbo clock speed 854 MHz vs 792 MHz Around 10% better turbo clock speed
Better overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.42 GHz vs 1.75 GHz Around 40% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
More threads 4 vs 2 Twice as many threads
Slightly better PassMark score 1,863 vs 849 Around 2.2x better PassMark score
Slightly better PassMark (Single core) score 534 vs 398 Around 35% better PassMark (Single core) score
Better overclocked clock speed (Water) 2.42 GHz vs 1.75 GHz Around 40% better overclocked clock speed (Water)
Front view of Intel Atom E3827

Reasons to consider the
Intel Atom E3827

Report a correction
Significantly better performance per dollar 0.88 pt/$ vs 0.52 pt/$ Around 70% better performance per dollar

Benchmarks Real world tests of Celeron J1900 vs Atom E3827

CompuBench 1.5 (Ocean surface simulation) Data courtesy CompuBench

Celeron J1900
36.45 fps
Atom E3827
32.06 fps

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Celeron J1900  vs
Atom E3827 
Clock speed 2 GHz 1.75 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 GPU
Label Intel® HD Graphics HD
Number of displays supported 2 2
GPU clock speed 688 MHz 542 MHz
Turbo clock speed 854 MHz 792 MHz

memory controller

Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Memory type
DDR3
DDR3L-1333
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 8,192 MB

details

Celeron J1900  vs
Atom E3827 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 4 2
L2 cache 2 MB 1 MB
L2 cache per core 0.5 MB/core 0.5 MB/core
Manufacture process 22 nm 22 nm
Max CPUs 1 1

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 2.42 GHz 1.75 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 2.42 GHz 1.75 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.42 GHz 1.75 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 4.49 pt/W
Typical power consumption 8.13W 6.5W

bus

Architecture FSB FSB
Number of links 1 1
Intel Celeron J1900
Report a correction
Intel Atom E3827
Report a correction

Read more

Comments

comments powered by Disqus