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 J3710

CPUBoss Winner
Front view of Intel J3710

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel J3710

Reasons to consider the
Intel J3710

Report a correction
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 11.51 pt/W vs 4.27 pt/W Around 2.8x better performance per watt
More number of displays supported 3 vs 2 1 more number of displays supported
Newer Jan, 2016 vs Oct, 2013 Release date over 2 years later
Front view of Intel Celeron J1900

Reasons to consider the
Intel Celeron J1900

Report a correction
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes vs No Somewhat common; Allows for maximum performance when needed, while conserving power and minimizing heat production when not needed
Higher clock speed 2 GHz vs 1.6 GHz Around 25% higher clock speed
Much higher GPU clock speed 688 MHz vs 400 MHz More than 70% higher GPU clock speed
Better turbo clock speed 854 MHz vs 740 MHz More than 15% better turbo clock speed
Significantly better overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.42 GHz vs 1.6 GHz More than 50% 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 J3710 vs Celeron J1900

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

J3710
2,005

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

J3710  vs
Celeron J1900 
Clock speed 1.6 GHz 2 GHz
Cores Quad core Quad core

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Supports dynamic frequency scaling No Yes

integrated graphics

GPU GPU GPU
Label Intel® HD Graphics 405 Intel® HD Graphics
Number of displays supported 3 2
GPU clock speed 400 MHz 688 MHz
Turbo clock speed 740 MHz 854 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

J3710  vs
Celeron 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 1.6 GHz 2.42 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 1.6 GHz 2.42 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 1.6 GHz 2.42 GHz

power consumption

TDP 6.5W 10W
Annual home energy cost 1.57 $/year 2.41 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 5.69 $/year 8.76 $/year
Performance per watt 11.51 pt/W 4.27 pt/W
Typical power consumption 5.28W 8.13W

bus

Architecture FSB FSB
Number of links 1 1
Intel J3710
Report a correction
Intel Celeron J1900
Report a correction

Read more

Comments

Showing 1 comment.
Considering the current situation where Pentium J3710 (2016) costs almost double the price of J1900 (2013) and yet they are almost identical in performance, it is not a tough choice to go for the cheaper Celeron. So unless someone needs the lower power consumption of the Pentium or requires 3 displays, I would stick to J1900.
comments powered by Disqus