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 Celeron 3765U

Intel Celeron 3765U

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
Much more l2 cache 2 MB vs 0.5 MB 4x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Much higher GPU clock speed 688 MHz vs 300 MHz More than 2.2x higher GPU clock speed
More cores 4 vs 2 Twice as many cores; run more applications at once
More l2 cache per core 0.5 MB/core vs 0.25 MB/core 2x more l2 cache per core
Better overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.42 GHz vs 1.9 GHz More than 25% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
More threads 4 vs 2 Twice as many threads
Slightly lower typical power consumption 8.13W vs 12.19W Around 35% lower typical power consumption
Better overclocked clock speed (Water) 2.42 GHz vs 1.9 GHz More than 25% better overclocked clock speed (Water)
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 Celeron 3765U

Reasons to consider the
Intel Celeron 3765U

Report a correction
Significantly newer manufacturing process 14 nm vs 22 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Much better performance per dollar 0.96 pt/$ vs 0.52 pt/$ Around 85% better performance per dollar
More number of displays supported 3 vs 2 1 more number of displays supported
Better PassMark (Single core) score 1,092 vs 534 More than 2x better PassMark (Single core) score
Better performance per watt 6.87 pt/W vs 4.27 pt/W More than 60% better performance per watt
Newer Apr, 2015 vs Oct, 2013 Release date over 1 years later

Benchmarks Real world tests of Celeron J1900 vs 3765U

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Celeron J1900  vs
3765U 
Clock speed 2 GHz 1.9 GHz
Cores Quad core Dual core

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

integrated graphics

GPU GPU GPU
Label Intel® HD Graphics Intel® HD Graphics
Number of displays supported 2 3
GPU clock speed 688 MHz 300 MHz
Turbo clock speed 854 MHz 850 MHz

memory controller

Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Memory type
DDR3
Channels Dual Channel Dual Channel
Maximum bandwidth 12,800 MB/s 12,800 MB/s
Maximum memory size 8,192 MB 16,384 MB

details

Celeron J1900  vs
3765U 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 4 2
L2 cache 2 MB 0.5 MB
L2 cache per core 0.5 MB/core 0.25 MB/core
Manufacture process 22 nm 14 nm
Max CPUs 1 1

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 2.42 GHz 1.9 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 2.42 GHz 1.9 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.42 GHz 1.9 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 6.87 pt/W
Typical power consumption 8.13W 12.19W

bus

Architecture FSB DMI 2.0
Number of links 1 1
Intel Celeron J1900
Report a correction
Intel Celeron 3765U
Report a correction

Read more

Comments

comments powered by Disqus