Celeron J1800 vs Athlon II Neo K325

VS

Aggregate performance score

Athlon II Neo K325
2010
2 cores / 2 threads, 12 Watt
0.26
Celeron J1800
2013
2 cores / 2 threads, 10 Watt
0.36
+38.5%

Celeron J1800 outperforms Athlon II Neo K325 by a substantial 38% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Athlon II Neo K325 and Celeron J1800 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking31503051
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD Athlon II NeoIntel Celeron
Power efficiency2.053.41
Architecture codenameGeneva (2010)Bay Trail-D (2013)
Release date12 May 2010 (14 years ago)1 November 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$72

Detailed specifications

Athlon II Neo K325 and Celeron J1800 basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.

Physical cores2 (Dual-core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads22
Base clock speedno data2.41 GHz
Boost clock speed1.3 GHz2.58 GHz
Bus rate2000 MHzno data
L1 cache256 KB112 KB
L2 cache1 MB1 MB
L3 cacheno data1 MB L2 Cache
Chip lithography45 nm22 nm
Maximum core temperatureno data105 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Athlon II Neo K325 and Celeron J1800 compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.

Number of CPUs in a configurationno data1
SocketS1FCBGA1170
Power consumption (TDP)12 Watt10 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon II Neo K325 and Celeron J1800. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsSSE4A, AMD64, Enhanced Virus Protection, Virtualization, PowerNow, HyperTransport 3.0no data
PowerNow+-
VirusProtect+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
PAEno data36 Bit
FDIno data-
RSTno data-

Security technologies

Athlon II Neo K325 and Celeron J1800 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

EDBno data+
Anti-Theftno data-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Athlon II Neo K325 and Celeron J1800 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-dno data-
VT-xno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon II Neo K325 and Celeron J1800. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3
Maximum memory sizeno data8 GB
Max memory channelsno data2

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataIntel HD Graphics for Intel Atom Processor Z3700 Series
Quick Sync Video-+
Graphics max frequencyno data792 MHz

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Athlon II Neo K325 and Celeron J1800 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data2

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Athlon II Neo K325 and Celeron J1800.

PCIe versionno data2.0
PCI Express lanesno data4

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

Athlon II Neo K325 0.26
Celeron J1800 0.36
+38.5%

Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

Athlon II Neo K325 417
Celeron J1800 573
+37.4%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.26 0.36
Recency 12 May 2010 1 November 2013
Chip lithography 45 nm 22 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 12 Watt 10 Watt

Celeron J1800 has a 38.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 104.5% more advanced lithography process, and 20% lower power consumption.

The Celeron J1800 is our recommended choice as it beats the Athlon II Neo K325 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon II Neo K325 and Celeron J1800, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


AMD Athlon II Neo K325
Athlon II Neo K325
Intel Celeron J1800
Celeron J1800

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


3.8 9 votes

Rate Athlon II Neo K325 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 539 votes

Rate Celeron J1800 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Athlon II Neo K325 or Celeron J1800, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.