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

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Pentium 4 506

Reasons to consider the
Intel Pentium 4 506

Report a correction
Much better geekbench 3 AES single core score 95,500 MB/s vs 56,900 MB/s Around 70% better geekbench 3 AES single core score
Higher clock speed 2.66 GHz vs 2 GHz Around 35% higher clock speed
Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.85 GHz vs 2.42 GHz Around 60% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Much more l2 cache per core 1 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core 2x more l2 cache per core
Better overclocked clock speed (Water) 2.67 GHz vs 2.42 GHz More than 10% better overclocked clock speed (Water)
Front view of Intel Celeron J1900

Reasons to consider the
Intel Celeron J1900

Report a correction
Much newer manufacturing process 22 nm vs 90 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Much better geekbench 2 (32-bit) score 2,887 vs 635 More than 4.5x 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
Has a built-in GPU Yes vs No Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required
Much lower typical power consumption 8.13W vs 68.25W 8.4x lower typical power consumption
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
Has virtualization support Yes vs No Somewhat common; Boosts performance of virtual machines
Newer Oct, 2013 vs Apr, 2005 Release date over 8 years later
Significantly better geekbench 3 Multi-Core score 2,927 vs 719 More than 4x better geekbench 3 Multi-Core score
More cores 4 vs 1 3 more cores; run more applications at once
Significantly better performance per watt 4.27 pt/W vs 0.93 pt/W More than 4.5x better performance per watt
More threads 4 vs 1 3 more threads
Much lower annual home energy cost 2.41 $/year vs 20.24 $/year 8.4x lower annual home energy cost
Much lower annual commercial energy cost 8.76 $/year vs 73.58 $/year 8.4x lower annual commercial energy cost

Benchmarks Real world tests of Pentium 4 506 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

Pentium 4 506
95,500 MB/s
Celeron J1900
56,900 MB/s

GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Pentium 4 506  vs
Celeron J1900 
Clock speed 2.66 GHz 2 GHz
Cores Single core Quad core

features

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

bus

Architecture FSB FSB
Number of links 1 1

details

Pentium 4 506  vs
Celeron J1900 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 1 4
L2 cache 1 MB 2 MB
L2 cache per core 1 MB/core 0.5 MB/core
Manufacture process 90 nm 22 nm
Max CPUs 1 1

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 3.85 GHz 2.42 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 2.67 GHz 2.42 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.85 GHz 2.42 GHz

power consumption

TDP 84W 10W
Annual home energy cost 20.24 $/year 2.41 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 73.58 $/year 8.76 $/year
Performance per watt 0.93 pt/W 4.27 pt/W
Typical power consumption 68.25W 8.13W
Intel Pentium 4 506
Report a correction
Intel Celeron J1900
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus