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 D 350

Intel Celeron D 350

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 newer manufacturing process 22 nm vs 90 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
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 1.3 GHz Around 55% higher clock speed
More advanced architecture x86-64 vs x86 A 64-bit architecture allows more RAM to be installed and accessed by the processor
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
Has virtualization support Yes vs No Somewhat common; Boosts performance of virtual machines
Newer Oct, 2013 vs Jun, 2005 Release date over 8 years later
More cores 4 vs 1 3 more cores; run more applications at once
Lower typical power consumption 8.13W vs 17.06W 2.1x lower typical power consumption
More threads 4 vs 1 3 more threads
Lower annual home energy cost 2.41 $/year vs 5.06 $/year 2.1x lower annual home energy cost
Lower annual commercial energy cost 8.76 $/year vs 18.4 $/year 2.1x lower annual commercial energy cost
Front view of Intel Celeron D 350

Reasons to consider the
Intel Celeron D 350

Report a correction
Much more l2 cache per core 1 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core 2x more l2 cache per core
Better overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.2 GHz vs 2.42 GHz More than 30% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Better PassMark (Single core) score 820 vs 534 Around 55% better PassMark (Single core) score
Better overclocked clock speed (Water) 3.2 GHz vs 2.42 GHz More than 30% better overclocked clock speed (Water)

Benchmarks Real world tests of Celeron J1900 vs D 350

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Celeron J1900  vs
D 350 
Clock speed 2 GHz 1.3 GHz
Cores Quad core Single core

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Has virtualization support Yes No
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
Supports ECC No No

details

Celeron J1900  vs
D 350 
Architecture x86-64 x86
Threads 4 1
L2 cache 2 MB 1 MB
L2 cache per core 0.5 MB/core 1 MB/core
Manufacture process 22 nm 90 nm
Max CPUs 1 1

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 2.42 GHz 3.2 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 2.42 GHz 3.2 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.42 GHz 3.2 GHz

power consumption

TDP 10W 21W
Annual home energy cost 2.41 $/year 5.06 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 8.76 $/year 18.4 $/year
Performance per watt 4.27 pt/W 4.04 pt/W
Typical power consumption 8.13W 17.06W

bus

Architecture FSB FSB
Number of links 1 1
Intel Celeron J1900
Report a correction
Intel Celeron D 350
Report a correction

Read more

Comments

comments powered by Disqus