Celeron J1900 vs Core 2 Extreme QX9300

Aggregate performance score

Core 2 Extreme QX9300
2008
4 cores / 4 threads, 45 Watt
1.14
+58.3%
Celeron J1900
2013
4 cores / 4 threads, 10 Watt
0.72

Core 2 Extreme QX9300 outperforms Celeron J1900 by an impressive 58% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core 2 Extreme QX9300 and Celeron J1900 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking23792678
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesCore 2 ExtremeIntel Celeron
Power efficiency2.406.81
Architecture codenamePenryn (2008−2011)Bay Trail-D (2013)
Release dateAugust 2008 (16 years ago)1 November 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$82

Detailed specifications

Core 2 Extreme QX9300 and Celeron J1900 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)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads44
Base clock speed2.53 GHz2 GHz
Boost clock speed2.53 GHz2.42 GHz
Bus rate1066 MHzno data
L1 cache64 KB224 KB
L2 cache12 MB2 MB
L3 cache0 KB2 MB L2 Cache
Chip lithography45 nm22 nm
Die size2x 107 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature100 °C105 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplier+-
VID voltage range1.05V-1.175Vno data

Compatibility

Information on Core 2 Extreme QX9300 and Celeron J1900 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 configuration21
SocketPGA478FCBGA1170
Power consumption (TDP)45 Watt10 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Extreme QX9300 and Celeron J1900. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Turbo Boost Technology--
Hyper-Threading Technology--
Demand Based Switching-no data
PAEno data36 Bit
FDIno data-
AMT+no data
FSB parity-no data
RSTno data-

Security technologies

Core 2 Extreme QX9300 and Celeron J1900 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+no data
EDB++
Anti-Theftno data-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core 2 Extreme QX9300 and Celeron J1900 are enumerated here.

VT-dno data-
VT-x++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core 2 Extreme QX9300 and Celeron J1900. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR3
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 data854 MHz

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Core 2 Extreme QX9300 and Celeron J1900 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data2

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core 2 Extreme QX9300 and Celeron J1900.

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.

Core 2 Extreme QX9300 1.14
+58.3%
Celeron J1900 0.72

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.

Core 2 Extreme QX9300 1805
+56.8%
Celeron J1900 1151

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.14 0.72
Chip lithography 45 nm 22 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 45 Watt 10 Watt

Core 2 Extreme QX9300 has a 58.3% higher aggregate performance score.

Celeron J1900, on the other hand, has a 104.5% more advanced lithography process, and 350% lower power consumption.

The Core 2 Extreme QX9300 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron J1900 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Extreme QX9300 and Celeron J1900, 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 Core 2 Extreme QX9300
Core 2 Extreme QX9300
Intel Celeron J1900
Celeron J1900

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.


4.1 91 vote

Rate Core 2 Extreme QX9300 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 196 votes

Rate Celeron J1900 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core 2 Extreme QX9300 or Celeron J1900, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.