Winner
Intel Celeron N2807
CPUBoss recommends the Intel Celeron N2807 based on its power consumption.
See full details | Intel Celeron N2807 vs J1900 |
![]() | Much better performance per watt 11.49 pt/W | ![]() | Slightly lower typical power consumption 3.49W |
![]() | Newer Feb, 2014 | ![]() | Slightly lower annual commercial energy cost 3.77 $/year |
![]() | Significantly more l2 cache 2 MB | ![]() | Much better geekbench 3 AES single core score 56,900 MB/s |
![]() | Higher clock speed 2 GHz | ![]() | Much higher GPU clock speed 688 MHz |
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 |
| |||||||
Much better performance per watt | 11.49 pt/W | vs | 4.27 pt/W | Around 2.8x better performance per watt | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Slightly lower typical power consumption | 3.49W | vs | 8.13W | 2.3x lower typical power consumption | |||
Newer | Feb, 2014 | vs | Oct, 2013 | Release date 4 months later | |||
Slightly lower annual commercial energy cost | 3.77 $/year | vs | 8.76 $/year | 2.3x lower annual commercial energy cost | |||
Slightly lower annual home energy cost | 1.04 $/year | vs | 2.41 $/year | 2.3x lower annual home energy cost | |||
| |||||||
Significantly more l2 cache | 2 MB | vs | 1 MB | 2x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later | |||
Much better geekbench 3 AES single core score | 56,900 MB/s | vs | 50,900 MB/s | More than 10% better geekbench 3 AES single core score | |||
Higher clock speed | 2 GHz | vs | 1.58 GHz | More than 25% higher clock speed | |||
Much higher GPU clock speed | 688 MHz | vs | 313 MHz | Around 2.2x higher GPU clock speed | |||
Higher turbo clock speed | 2.42 GHz | vs | 2.17 GHz | More than 10% higher turbo clock speed | |||
Better turbo clock speed | 854 MHz | vs | 750 MHz | Around 15% better turbo clock speed | |||
More cores | 4 | vs | 2 | Twice as many cores; run more applications at once | |||
More threads | 4 | vs | 2 | Twice as many threads | |||
Slightly better PassMark score | 1,863 | vs | 852 | Around 2.2x better PassMark score | |||
Better overclocked clock speed (Air) | 2.42 GHz | vs | 2.17 GHz | More than 10% better overclocked clock speed (Air) | |||
Slightly better performance per dollar | 0.52 pt/$ | vs | 0.46 pt/$ | Around 15% better performance per dollar | |||
Significantly better overclocked clock speed (Water) | 2.42 GHz | vs | 1.58 GHz | Around 55% better overclocked clock speed (Water) |
summary | Celeron N2807 | vs | J1900 |
---|---|---|---|
Clock speed | 1.58 GHz | 2 GHz | |
Turbo clock speed | 2.17 GHz | 2.42 GHz | |
Cores | Dual core | Quad 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 | 2 | |
GPU clock speed | 313 MHz | 688 MHz | |
Turbo clock speed | 750 MHz | 854 MHz | |
memory controller | |||
Memory controller | Built-in | Built-in | |
Memory type | |||
DDR3 | |||
Channels | Single Channel | Dual Channel | |
Supports ECC | No | No | |
Maximum bandwidth | 6,400 MB/s | 12,800 MB/s | |
Maximum memory size | 4,096 MB | 8,192 MB |
details | Celeron N2807 | vs | J1900 |
---|---|---|---|
Architecture | x86-64 | x86-64 | |
Threads | 2 | 4 | |
L2 cache | 1 MB | 2 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 | 2.17 GHz | 2.42 GHz | |
Overclocked clock speed (Water) | 1.58 GHz | 2.42 GHz | |
Overclocked clock speed (Air) | 2.17 GHz | 2.42 GHz | |
power consumption | |||
TDP | 4.3W | 10W | |
Annual home energy cost | 1.04 $/year | 2.41 $/year | |
Annual commercial energy cost | 3.77 $/year | 8.76 $/year | |
Performance per watt | 11.49 pt/W | 4.27 pt/W | |
Typical power consumption | 3.49W | 8.13W | |
bus | |||
Architecture | FSB | FSB | |
Number of links | 1 | 1 |
Intel Celeron N2807 ![]() | Intel Celeron J1900 ![]() |
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$125 | $82 | |
3220 vs J1900 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$107 | $82 | |
N3150 vs J1900 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$72 | $82 | |
J1800 vs J1900 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$94 | $82 | |
J2900 vs J1900 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$75 | $82 | |
1037U vs J1900 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$82 | ||
J3455 vs J1900 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$75 | $82 | |
1007U vs J1900 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$300 | $305 | |
2500 vs W3520 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$350 | $272 | |
6700K vs 4790K | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$281 | ||
6410 vs 4200U | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$281 | ||
7th Gen A9-9410 vs 6200U | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$161 | $275 | |
N3540 vs 4005U | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$225 | $134 | |
3217U vs 847 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$180 | ||
5200 vs 3470 | ||