Celeron 420 vs J1800

VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron J1800
2013
2 cores / 2 threads, 10 Watt
0.36
+140%
Celeron 420
2007
1 core / 1 thread, 35 Watt
0.15

Celeron J1800 outperforms Celeron 420 by a whopping 140% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron J1800 and Celeron 420 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking30513324
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesIntel Celeronno data
Power efficiency3.410.41
Architecture codenameBay Trail-D (2013)Conroe-L (2007−2008)
Release date1 November 2013 (11 years ago)June 2007 (17 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$72$23

Detailed specifications

Celeron J1800 and Celeron 420 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)1 (Single-Core)
Threads21
Base clock speed2.41 GHz1.6 GHz
Boost clock speed2.58 GHz1.6 GHz
L1 cache112 KB64 KB
L2 cache1 MB512 KB
L3 cache1 MB L2 Cache0 KB
Chip lithography22 nm65 nm
Die sizeno data77 mm2
Maximum core temperature105 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data60 °C
Number of transistorsno data105 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage rangeno data1V-1.3375V

Compatibility

Information on Celeron J1800 and Celeron 420 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 configuration11
SocketFCBGA1170LGA775
Power consumption (TDP)10 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron J1800 and Celeron 420. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+-
Turbo Boost Technology--
Hyper-Threading Technology--
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Demand Based Switchingno data-
PAE36 Bitno data
FDI-no data
FSB parityno data-
RST-no data

Security technologies

Celeron J1800 and Celeron 420 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
EDB++
Anti-Theft-no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron J1800 and Celeron 420 are enumerated here.

VT-d--
VT-x+-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron J1800 and Celeron 420. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR1, DDR2, DDR3
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 Celeron 420 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported2no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron J1800 and Celeron 420.

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
+140%
Celeron 420 0.15

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 573
+144%
Celeron 420 235

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.36 0.15
Physical cores 2 1
Threads 2 1
Chip lithography 22 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 10 Watt 35 Watt

Celeron J1800 has a 140% higher aggregate performance score, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, a 195.5% more advanced lithography process, and 250% lower power consumption.

The Celeron J1800 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron 420 in performance tests.

Be aware that Celeron J1800 is a notebook processor while Celeron 420 is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron J1800 and Celeron 420, 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
Intel Celeron 420
Celeron 420

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
2.9 170 votes

Rate Celeron 420 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron J1800 or Celeron 420, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.