CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of N3050 vs J1900 among all CPUs

Performance

Benchmark performance using all cores
Celeron N3050
5.0
Celeron J1900
5.1
Core i3 3220
3.6
PCMark 8 Home 3.0 Accelerated, PassMark and 1 more

Single-core Performance

Individual core benchmark performance
Celeron N3050
5.2
Celeron J1900
5.3
Core i3 3220
6.9
PassMark (Single Core), Geekbench 3 Single Core and 1 more

Integrated Graphics

Integrated GPU performance for graphics
Celeron N3050
n.d.
Celeron J1900
n.d.
Core i3 3220
1.5
Sky Diver and Cloud Gate

Integrated Graphics (OpenCL)

Integrated GPU performance for parallel computing
Celeron N3050
5.9
Celeron J1900
5.1
Core i3 3220
4.9
CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 4 more

Performance per Watt

How efficiently does the processor use electricity?
Celeron N3050
8.1
Celeron J1900
6.7
Core i3 3220
5.2
Sky Diver, Cloud Gate, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more

Value

Are you paying a premium for performance?
Celeron N3050
n.d.
Celeron J1900
n.d.
Core i3 3220
6.2
Sky Diver, Cloud Gate, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more
8.3

CPUBoss Score

Combination of all six facets
Celeron N3050
8.3
Celeron J1900
7.7
Core i3 3220
6.4

Winner
Intel Celeron N3050 

CPUBoss recommends the Intel Celeron N3050  based on its power consumption.

See full details

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

Intel Celeron N3050

CPUBoss Winner
 Front view of Intel Celeron N3050
Front view of Intel Celeron J1900

Intel Celeron J1900

Join the discussion

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Celeron N3050

Reasons to consider the
Intel Celeron N3050

Report a correction
Much better CompuBench 1.5 face detection score 4.48 mPixels/s vs 0.39 mPixels/s Around 11.5x better CompuBench 1.5 face detection score
Significantly newer manufacturing process 14 nm vs 22 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Much more l2 cache per core 1 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core 2x more l2 cache per core
More number of displays supported 3 vs 2 1 more number of displays supported
Significantly better performance per watt 8.65 pt/W vs 4.27 pt/W More than 2x better performance per watt
Newer Jan, 2015 vs Oct, 2013 Release date over 1 years later
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 350.4 MB/s Around 162.5x better geekbench 3 AES single core score
Higher clock speed 2 GHz vs 1.6 GHz Around 25% higher clock speed
Much higher GPU clock speed 688 MHz vs 320 MHz Around 2.2x higher GPU clock speed
Higher turbo clock speed 2.42 GHz vs 2.16 GHz More than 10% higher 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 885 More than 2x better PassMark score
Better overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.42 GHz vs 2.14 GHz Around 15% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Significantly better overclocked clock speed (Water) 2.42 GHz vs 1.6 GHz More than 50% better overclocked clock speed (Water)

Benchmarks Real world tests of Celeron N3050 vs J1900

CompuBench 1.5 (Bitcoin mining) Data courtesy CompuBench

Celeron N3050
6.77 mHash/s
Celeron J1900
1.78 mHash/s

CompuBench 1.5 (Face detection)

Celeron N3050
4.48 mPixels/s
Celeron J1900
0.39 mPixels/s

CompuBench 1.5 (T-Rex) Data courtesy CompuBench

Celeron N3050
0.44 fps
Celeron J1900
-1 fps

GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Celeron N3050
1,584
Celeron J1900
2,927

GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Celeron N3050
879
Celeron J1900
924

GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Celeron N3050
350.4 MB/s
Celeron J1900
56,900 MB/s

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

Celeron N3050
885
Celeron J1900
1,863

PassMark (Single Core)

Celeron N3050
467
Celeron J1900
534

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

 Celeron N3050  vs
J1900 
Clock speed 1.6 GHz 2 GHz
Turbo clock speed 2.16 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 3 2
GPU clock speed 320 MHz 688 MHz

memory controller
Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Memory type
DDR3L-1600
DDR3
Channels Dual Channel Dual Channel
Supports ECC No No
Maximum bandwidth 25,600 MB/s 12,800 MB/s
Maximum memory size 8,192 MB 8,192 MB

details

 Celeron N3050  vs
J1900 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 2 4
L2 cache 2 MB 2 MB
L2 cache per core 1 MB/core 0.5 MB/core
Manufacture process 14 nm 22 nm
Max CPUs 1 1

overclocking
Overclocked clock speed 2.14 GHz 2.42 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 1.6 GHz 2.42 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.14 GHz 2.42 GHz

power consumption
TDP 6W 10W
Annual home energy cost 1.45 $/year 2.41 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 5.26 $/year 8.76 $/year
Performance per watt 8.65 pt/W 4.27 pt/W
Typical power consumption 4.88W 8.13W

bus
Architecture FSB FSB
Number of links 1 1
Intel Celeron N3050
Report a correction
Intel Celeron J1900
Report a correction

Read more

Comments

comments powered by Disqus

features

information

  • terms and privacy
  • about
  • blog

on the web

CPUBoss