0 Comments
| Intel Celeron N2820 vs J1900 |
Released November, 2013
Intel Celeron N2820
- 2.13 GHz
- Dual core
Reasons to buy the Intel Celeron N2820
![]() | Significantly better performance per watt 7.97 pt/W |
VS
Released October, 2013
Intel Celeron J1900
- 2 GHz
- Quad core
Reasons to buy the J1900
![]() | Much better geekbench 2 (32-bit) score 2,887 | ![]() | Significantly more l2 cache 2 MB |
![]() | Much higher GPU clock speed 688 MHz | ![]() | Better turbo clock speed 854 MHz |
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?
VS
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
Significantly better performance per watt | 7.97 pt/W | vs | 4.27 pt/W | More than 85% better performance per watt | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| |||||||
Much better geekbench 2 (32-bit) score | 2,887 | vs | 1,452 | Around 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 | |||
Much higher GPU clock speed | 688 MHz | vs | 313 MHz | Around 2.2x higher GPU clock speed | |||
Better turbo clock speed | 854 MHz | vs | 756 MHz | Around 15% better turbo clock speed | |||
More cores | 4 | vs | 2 | Twice as many cores; run more applications at once | |||
Better geekbench 3 AES single core score | 56,900 MB/s | vs | 56,000 MB/s | Almost the same | |||
More threads | 4 | vs | 2 | Twice as many threads | |||
Better performance per dollar | 0.52 pt/$ | vs | 0.45 pt/$ | More than 15% better performance per dollar | |||
Better overclocked clock speed (Water) | 2.42 GHz | vs | 2.13 GHz | Around 15% better overclocked clock speed (Water) |
Benchmarks Real world tests of Celeron N2820 vs J1900
GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Celeron N2820
1,514
Celeron J1900
2,927
GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Celeron N2820
867
Celeron J1900
924
GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Celeron N2820
56,000 MB/s
Celeron J1900
56,900 MB/s
GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Celeron N2820
1,452
Celeron J1900
2,887
GeekBench
Celeron N2820
1,452
Celeron J1900
2,887
PassMark Data courtesy Passmark
Celeron N2820
960
Celeron J1900
1,863
PassMark (Single Core)
Celeron N2820
513
Celeron J1900
534
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | Celeron N2820 | vs | J1900 |
---|---|---|---|
Clock speed | 2.13 GHz | 2 GHz | |
Turbo clock speed | 2.39 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 | 756 MHz | 854 MHz | |
memory controller | |||
Memory controller | Built-in | Built-in | |
Memory type | |||
DDR3L-1066 | |||
DDR3 | |||
Channels | Dual Channel | Dual Channel | |
Supports ECC | No | No | |
Maximum bandwidth | 12,800 MB/s | 12,800 MB/s | |
Maximum memory size | 8,192 MB | 8,192 MB |
details | Celeron N2820 | 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 | 2.4 GHz | 2.42 GHz | |
Overclocked clock speed (Water) | 2.13 GHz | 2.42 GHz | |
Overclocked clock speed (Air) | 2.4 GHz | 2.42 GHz | |
power consumption | |||
TDP | 7.5W | 10W | |
Annual home energy cost | 1.81 $/year | 2.41 $/year | |
Annual commercial energy cost | 6.57 $/year | 8.76 $/year | |
Performance per watt | 7.97 pt/W | 4.27 pt/W | |
Typical power consumption | 6.09W | 8.13W | |
bus | |||
Architecture | FSB | FSB | |
Number of links | 1 | 1 |
Intel Celeron N2820 ![]() | Intel Celeron J1900 ![]() |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$82 | $125 | |
J1900 vs 3220 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$82 | $107 | |
J1900 vs N3150 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$82 | $72 | |
J1900 vs J1800 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$82 | $94 | |
J1900 vs J2900 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$82 | $75 | |
J1900 vs 1037U | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$82 | ||
J1900 vs J3455 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$82 | ||
J1900 vs J3160 | ||
Popular Comparisons
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$305 | $300 | |
W3520 vs 2500 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$272 | $350 | |
4790K vs 6700K | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$281 | ||
4200U vs 6410 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$281 | ||
6200U vs 7th Gen A9-9410 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$275 | $161 | |
4005U vs N3540 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$134 | $225 | |
847 vs 3217U | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$180 | ||
3470 vs 5200 | ||
Read more
Comments
Showing 1 comment.
Tester (04:36 PM, June 11, 2014)