Winner
Intel Celeron J1900
CPUBoss recommends the Intel Celeron J1900 based on its performance, power consumption and value.
See full details Intel Core Duo T2500 vs Celeron J1900 |
Released January, 2006
Intel Core Duo T2500
- 2 GHz
- Dual core
5.1 Out of 10
Reasons to buy the Intel Core Duo T2500
 | Much better geekbench 3 AES single core score 79,550 MB/s | | Much more l2 cache per core 1 MB/core |
VS
Released October, 2013
Intel Celeron J1900
- 2 GHz
- Quad core
7.7 Out of 10
Reasons to buy the Celeron J1900
| | Much newer manufacturing process 22 nm | | Much better geekbench 2 (32-bit) score 2,887 |
| | More advanced architecture x86-64 | | Has a built-in GPU Yes |
CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of T2500 vs J1900 among all CPUs
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 | |
| 7.7 | CPUBoss Score |
Combination of all six facets | |
 | Winner |
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?
VS
| |  | Intel Celeron J1900CPUBoss Winner |
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
| Much better geekbench 3 AES single core score | 79,550 MB/s | vs | 56,900 MB/s | Around 40% better geekbench 3 AES single core score | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Much more l2 cache per core | 1 MB/core | vs | 0.5 MB/core | 2x more l2 cache per core | |||
| |||||||
| Much newer manufacturing process | 22 nm | vs | 65 nm | A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor | |||
| Much better geekbench 2 (32-bit) score | 2,887 | vs | 1,336 | Around 2.2x better geekbench 2 (32-bit) score | |||
| 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 | |||
| Newer | Oct, 2013 | vs | Jan, 2006 | Release date over 7 years later | |||
| Lower typical power consumption | 8.13W | vs | 25.19W | 3.1x lower typical power consumption | |||
| More cores | 4 | vs | 2 | Twice as many cores; run more applications at once | |||
| Better performance per dollar | 0.52 pt/$ | vs | 0.29 pt/$ | Around 85% better performance per dollar | |||
| Better performance per watt | 4.27 pt/W | vs | 2.22 pt/W | Around 95% better performance per watt | |||
| More threads | 4 | vs | 2 | Twice as many threads | |||
| Slightly better PassMark score | 1,863 | vs | 876 | Around 2.2x better PassMark score | |||
| Better overclocked clock speed (Air) | 2.42 GHz | vs | 2.22 GHz | Around 10% better overclocked clock speed (Air) | |||
| Lower annual home energy cost | 2.41 $/year | vs | 7.47 $/year | 3.1x lower annual home energy cost | |||
| Lower annual commercial energy cost | 8.76 $/year | vs | 27.16 $/year | 3.1x lower annual commercial energy cost | |||
| Better overclocked clock speed (Water) | 2.42 GHz | vs | 2 GHz | More than 20% better overclocked clock speed (Water) | |||
Report a correction
Benchmarks Real world tests of Core Duo T2500 vs Celeron J1900
GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs
GeekBench
PassMark Data courtesy Passmark
PassMark (Single Core)
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | Core Duo T2500 | vs | Celeron J1900 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clock speed | 2 GHz | 2 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 | None | GPU | |
| Label | N/A | Intel® HD Graphics | |
| Number of displays supported | N/A | 2 | |
| GPU clock speed | N/A | 688 MHz | |
| Turbo clock speed | N/A | 854 MHz | |
memory controller | |||
| Memory controller | Built-in | Built-in | |
| Supports ECC | No | No | |
details | Core Duo T2500 | vs | Celeron J1900 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Architecture | x86 | x86-64 | |
| Threads | 2 | 4 | |
| L2 cache | 2 MB | 2 MB | |
| L2 cache per core | 1 MB/core | 0.5 MB/core | |
| Manufacture process | 65 nm | 22 nm | |
| Max CPUs | 1 | 1 | |
overclocking | |||
| Overclocked clock speed | 2.22 GHz | 2.42 GHz | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Water) | 2 GHz | 2.42 GHz | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Air) | 2.22 GHz | 2.42 GHz | |
power consumption | |||
| TDP | 31W | 10W | |
| Annual home energy cost | 7.47 $/year | 2.41 $/year | |
| Annual commercial energy cost | 27.16 $/year | 8.76 $/year | |
| Performance per watt | 2.22 pt/W | 4.27 pt/W | |
| Typical power consumption | 25.19W | 8.13W | |
bus | |||
| Architecture | FSB | FSB | |
| Number of links | 1 | 1 | |
 Intel Core Duo T2500  Report a correction |  Intel Celeron J1900 Report a correction |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $125 | $82 | |
| 3220 vs J1900 | ||
 | VS | |
| $82 | ||
| J3455 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 | |
| $52 | $82 | |
| E3845 vs J1900 | ||
Popular Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $300 | $305 | |
| 2500 vs W3520 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| 7th Gen A9-9410 vs 6200U | ||
 | VS |  |
| $350 | $272 | |
| 6700K vs 4790K | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| 6410 vs 4200U | ||
 | VS | |
| $50 | $125 | |
| 5300 vs 3220 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $180 | ||
| 5200 vs 3470 | ||
 | VS | |
| $350 | ||
| 7th Gen A12-9700P vs 6700K | ||
