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

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 25,100 MB/s More than 2.2x better geekbench 3 AES single core score
Much better geekbench 2 (32-bit) score 2,887 vs 899 Around 3.2x better geekbench 2 (32-bit) score
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
Higher clock speed 2 GHz vs 1.6 GHz Around 25% higher clock speed
Significantly newer manufacturing process 22 nm vs 32 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Has virtualization support Yes vs No Somewhat common; Boosts performance of virtual machines
Much higher GPU clock speed 688 MHz vs 400 MHz More than 70% higher GPU clock speed
More cores 4 vs 2 Twice as many cores; run more applications at once
Significantly better overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.42 GHz vs 1.6 GHz More than 50% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Better PassMark score 1,863 vs 527 More than 3.5x better PassMark score
Newer Oct, 2013 vs Dec, 2011 Release date over 1 years later
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 N2600

Reasons to consider the
Intel Atom N2600

Report a correction
Significantly better performance per watt 8.43 pt/W vs 4.27 pt/W More than 95% better performance per watt
Better performance per dollar 0.7 pt/$ vs 0.52 pt/$ Around 35% better performance per dollar
Lower typical power consumption 2.84W vs 8.13W 2.9x lower typical power consumption
Lower annual commercial energy cost 3.07 $/year vs 8.76 $/year 2.9x lower annual commercial energy cost
Lower annual home energy cost 0.84 $/year vs 2.41 $/year 2.9x lower annual home energy cost

Benchmarks Real world tests of Celeron J1900 vs Atom N2600

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 N2600
25,100 MB/s

GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Celeron J1900  vs
Atom N2600 
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 Yes

integrated graphics

GPU GPU GPU
Label Intel® HD Graphics Integrated
GPU clock speed 688 MHz 400 MHz

memory controller

Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Memory type
DDR3
Channels Dual Channel Single Channel
Maximum bandwidth 12,800 MB/s 6,400 MB/s
Maximum memory size 8,192 MB 2,498.56 MB

details

Celeron J1900  vs
Atom N2600 
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 32 nm
Max CPUs 1 1

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 2.42 GHz 1.6 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 2.42 GHz 1.6 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.42 GHz 1.6 GHz

power consumption

TDP 10W 3.5W
Annual home energy cost 2.41 $/year 0.84 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 8.76 $/year 3.07 $/year
Performance per watt 4.27 pt/W 8.43 pt/W
Typical power consumption 8.13W 2.84W

bus

Architecture FSB DMI
Number of links 1 1
Intel Celeron J1900
Report a correction
Intel Atom N2600
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus