Winner
Intel Celeron N3150
CPUBoss recommends the Intel Celeron N3150 based on its power consumption and value.
See full details | Intel Celeron N3150 vs J1900 |
![]() | Much better CompuBench 1.5 face detection score 4.72 mPixels/s | ![]() | Significantly newer manufacturing process 14 nm |
![]() | Much better performance per watt 10.68 pt/W | ![]() | More number of displays supported 3 |
![]() | Much better geekbench 3 AES single core score 56,900 MB/s | ![]() | Higher clock speed 2 GHz |
![]() | Much higher GPU clock speed 688 MHz | ![]() | Higher turbo clock speed 2.42 GHz |
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 |
Intel Celeron N3150CPUBoss Winner | ![]() | |
| |||||||
Much better CompuBench 1.5 face detection score | 4.72 mPixels/s | vs | 0.39 mPixels/s | More than 12x 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 better performance per watt | 10.68 pt/W | vs | 4.27 pt/W | Around 2.5x better performance per watt | |||
More number of displays supported | 3 | vs | 2 | 1 more number of displays supported | |||
Newer | Jan, 2015 | vs | Oct, 2013 | Release date over 1 years later | |||
Better performance per dollar | 0.6 pt/$ | vs | 0.52 pt/$ | Around 15% better performance per dollar | |||
| |||||||
Much better geekbench 3 AES single core score | 56,900 MB/s | vs | 335.9 MB/s | Around 169.5x 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 | 2.08 GHz | More than 15% higher turbo clock speed | |||
Better overclocked clock speed (Air) | 2.42 GHz | vs | 1.75 GHz | Around 40% 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) |
summary | Celeron N3150 | vs | J1900 |
---|---|---|---|
Clock speed | 1.6 GHz | 2 GHz | |
Turbo clock speed | 2.08 GHz | 2.42 GHz | |
Cores | Quad 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 N3150 | vs | J1900 |
---|---|---|---|
Architecture | x86-64 | x86-64 | |
Threads | 4 | 4 | |
L2 cache | 2 MB | 2 MB | |
L2 cache per core | 0.5 MB/core | 0.5 MB/core | |
Manufacture process | 14 nm | 22 nm | |
Max CPUs | 1 | 1 | |
overclocking | |||
Overclocked clock speed | 1.75 GHz | 2.42 GHz | |
Overclocked clock speed (Water) | 1.6 GHz | 2.42 GHz | |
Overclocked clock speed (Air) | 1.75 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 | 10.68 pt/W | 4.27 pt/W | |
Typical power consumption | 4.88W | 8.13W | |
bus | |||
Architecture | FSB | FSB | |
Number of links | 1 | 1 |
Intel Celeron N3150 ![]() | Intel Celeron J1900 ![]() |
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$125 | $82 | |
Intel Core i3 3220 vs Celeron J1900 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$72 | $82 | |
Intel Celeron J1800 vs J1900 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$94 | $82 | |
Intel Pentium J2900 vs Celeron J1900 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$75 | $82 | |
Intel Celeron 1037U vs J1900 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$82 | ||
Intel J3455 vs Celeron J1900 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$75 | $82 | |
Intel Celeron 1007U vs J1900 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$161 | $107 | |
Intel Pentium N3700 vs Celeron N3150 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$300 | $305 | |
Intel Core i5 2500 vs Xeon W3520 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$350 | $272 | |
Intel Core i7 6700K vs 4790K | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$281 | ||
AMD A8 6410 vs Intel Core i5 4200U | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$281 | ||
AMD A9 7th Gen A9-9410 vs Intel Core i5 6200U | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$161 | $275 | |
Intel Pentium N3540 vs Core i3 4005U | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$225 | $134 | |
Intel Core i3 3217U vs Celeron 847 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$180 | ||
AMD A6 5200 vs Intel Core i5 3470 | ||