Turion 64 MK-36 vs Celeron J1850

VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron J1850
2013
4 cores / 4 threads, 10 Watt
0.59
+181%
Turion 64 MK-36
1 core / 1 thread, 31 Watt
0.21

Celeron J1850 outperforms Turion 64 MK-36 by a whopping 181% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron J1850 and Turion 64 MK-36 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking27973207
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel CeleronTurion 64
Power efficiency5.580.64
Architecture codenameBay Trail-D (2013)Richmond
Release date1 September 2013 (11 years ago)no data (2024 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$82no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron J1850 and Turion 64 MK-36 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)1 (Single-Core)
Threads41
Base clock speed2 GHzno data
Boost clock speed2 GHz2 GHz
Bus rateno data800 MHz
L1 cache224 KBno data
L2 cache2 MBno data
L3 cache2 MB L2 Cacheno data
Chip lithography22 nm90 nm
Maximum core temperature100 °Cno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Celeron J1850 and Turion 64 MK-36 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 J1850 and Turion 64 MK-36. 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 J1850 and Turion 64 MK-36 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 J1850 and Turion 64 MK-36 are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron J1850 and Turion 64 MK-36. 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
Graphics max frequency792 MHzno data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron J1850 and Turion 64 MK-36 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported2no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron J1850 and Turion 64 MK-36.

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 J1850 0.59
+181%
Turion 64 MK-36 0.21

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 J1850 942
+182%
Turion 64 MK-36 334

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.59 0.21
Physical cores 4 1
Threads 4 1
Chip lithography 22 nm 90 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 10 Watt 31 Watt

Celeron J1850 has a 181% higher aggregate performance score, 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads, a 309.1% more advanced lithography process, and 210% lower power consumption.

The Celeron J1850 is our recommended choice as it beats the Turion 64 MK-36 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron J1850 and Turion 64 MK-36, 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 J1850
Celeron J1850
AMD Turion 64 MK-36
Turion 64 MK-36

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 11 votes

Rate Celeron J1850 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 9 votes

Rate Turion 64 MK-36 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron J1850 or Turion 64 MK-36, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.