Athlon 64 X2 TK-57 vs Celeron J1800

VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron J1800
2013
2 cores / 2 threads, 10 Watt
0.36
Athlon 64 X2 TK-57
2 cores / 2 threads, 31 Watt
0.39
+8.3%

Athlon 64 X2 TK-57 outperforms Celeron J1800 by a small 8% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron J1800 and Athlon 64 X2 TK-57 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking30503022
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel Celeron2x Athlon 64
Power efficiency3.401.19
Architecture codenameBay Trail-D (2013)Hawk-256
Release date1 November 2013 (11 years ago)no data
Launch price (MSRP)$72no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron J1800 and Athlon 64 X2 TK-57 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 speed2.41 GHzno data
Boost clock speed2.58 GHz1.9 GHz
Bus rateno data667 MHz
L1 cache112 KBno data
L2 cache1 MBno data
L3 cache1 MB L2 Cacheno data
Chip lithography22 nm65 nm
Maximum core temperature105 °Cno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Celeron J1800 and Athlon 64 X2 TK-57 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 configuration1no data
SocketFCBGA1170no data
Power consumption (TDP)10 Watt31 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron J1800 and Athlon 64 X2 TK-57. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
PAE36 Bitno data
FDI-no data
RST-no data

Security technologies

Celeron J1800 and Athlon 64 X2 TK-57 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

EDB+no data
Anti-Theft-no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron J1800 and Athlon 64 X2 TK-57 are enumerated here.

VT-d-no data
VT-x+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron J1800 and Athlon 64 X2 TK-57. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3no data
Maximum memory size8 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel HD Graphics for Intel Atom Processor Z3700 Seriesno data
Quick Sync Video+-
Graphics max frequency792 MHzno data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron J1800 and Athlon 64 X2 TK-57 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported2no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron J1800 and Athlon 64 X2 TK-57.

PCIe version2.0no data
PCI Express lanes4no data

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.

Celeron J1800 0.36
Athlon 64 X2 TK-57 0.39
+8.3%

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.

Celeron J1800 574
Athlon 64 X2 TK-57 620
+8%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.36 0.39
Chip lithography 22 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 10 Watt 31 Watt

Celeron J1800 has a 195.5% more advanced lithography process, and 210% lower power consumption.

Athlon 64 X2 TK-57, on the other hand, has a 8.3% higher aggregate performance score.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Celeron J1800 and Athlon 64 X2 TK-57.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron J1800 and Athlon 64 X2 TK-57, 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.


Intel Celeron J1800
Celeron J1800
AMD Athlon 64 X2 TK-57
Athlon 64 X2 TK-57

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.


2.8 539 votes

Rate Celeron J1800 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 22 votes

Rate Athlon 64 X2 TK-57 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron J1800 or Athlon 64 X2 TK-57, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.