Celeron J1750 vs E2-1800

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

E2-1800
2012
2 cores / 2 threads, 18 Watt
0.28
Celeron J1750
2013
2 cores / 2 threads, 10 Watt
0.37
+32.1%

Celeron J1750 outperforms E2-1800 by a substantial 32% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing E2-1800 and Celeron J1750 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking31323035
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
SeriesAMD E-SeriesIntel Celeron
Power efficiency1.463.48
Architecture codenameZacate (2011−2013)Bay Trail-D (2013)
Release date6 June 2012 (12 years ago)1 September 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$72

Detailed specifications

E2-1800 and Celeron J1750 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 speed1.7 GHz2.41 GHz
L1 cache64K (per core)112 KB
L2 cache512K (per core)1 MB
L3 cache0 KB1 MB L2 Cache
Chip lithography40 nm22 nm
Die size75 mm2no data
Maximum core temperatureno data100 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)100 °Cno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on E2-1800 and Celeron J1750 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
SocketFT1 BGA 413-BallFCBGA1170
Power consumption (TDP)18 Watt10 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by E2-1800 and Celeron J1750. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsMMX(+), SSE(1,2,3,3S,4A), AMD-Vno data
PowerNow+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
PAEno data36 Bit
FDIno data-
RSTno data-

Security technologies

E2-1800 and Celeron J1750 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 E2-1800 and Celeron J1750 are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by E2-1800 and Celeron J1750. 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 card
Compare
AMD Radeon HD 7340Intel HD Graphics for Intel Atom Processor Z3700 Series
Graphics max frequencyno data750 MHz

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of E2-1800 and Celeron J1750 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data2

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by E2-1800 and Celeron J1750.

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.

E2-1800 0.28
Celeron J1750 0.37
+32.1%

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.

E2-1800 449
Celeron J1750 595
+32.5%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.28 0.37
Integrated graphics card 0.40 0.77
Recency 6 June 2012 1 September 2013
Chip lithography 40 nm 22 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 18 Watt 10 Watt

Celeron J1750 has a 32.1% higher aggregate performance score, 92.5% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 1 year, a 81.8% more advanced lithography process, and 80% lower power consumption.

The Celeron J1750 is our recommended choice as it beats the E2-1800 in performance tests.

Note that E2-1800 is a desktop processor while Celeron J1750 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between E2-1800 and Celeron J1750, 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 E2-1800
E2-1800
Intel Celeron J1750
Celeron J1750

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.


2.8 166 votes

Rate E2-1800 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2 4 votes

Rate Celeron J1750 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about E2-1800 or Celeron J1750, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.