Celeron J1800 vs C-70

VS

Aggregate performance score

C-70
2012
2 cores / 2 threads, 9 Watt
0.20
Celeron J1800
2013
2 cores / 2 threads, 10 Watt
0.36
+80%

Celeron J1800 outperforms C-70 by an impressive 80% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing C-70 and Celeron J1800 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking32363051
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD C-SeriesIntel Celeron
Power efficiency2.103.41
Architecture codenameOntario (2011−2012)Bay Trail-D (2013)
Release date1 September 2012 (12 years ago)1 November 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$72

Detailed specifications

C-70 and Celeron J1800 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 speed1 GHz2.41 GHz
Boost clock speed1.33 GHz2.58 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 data105 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on C-70 and Celeron J1800 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)9 Watt10 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by C-70 and Celeron J1800. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsMMX(+), SSE(1,2,3,3S,4A), AMD-V, Radeon HD 6290 (276-400 MHz)no data
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
PAEno data36 Bit
FDIno data-
RSTno data-

Security technologies

C-70 and Celeron J1800 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 C-70 and Celeron J1800 are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by C-70 and Celeron J1800. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3 Single-channelDDR3
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 6290 (280 - 400 MHz)Intel HD Graphics for Intel Atom Processor Z3700 Series
Quick Sync Video-+
Graphics max frequencyno data792 MHz

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of C-70 and Celeron J1800 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data2

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by C-70 and Celeron J1800.

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.

C-70 0.20
Celeron J1800 0.36
+80%

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.

C-70 315
Celeron J1800 573
+81.9%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.20 0.36
Integrated graphics card 0.27 0.77
Recency 1 September 2012 1 November 2013
Chip lithography 40 nm 22 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 9 Watt 10 Watt

C-70 has 11.1% lower power consumption.

Celeron J1800, on the other hand, has a 80% higher aggregate performance score, 185.2% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 1 year, and a 81.8% more advanced lithography process.

The Celeron J1800 is our recommended choice as it beats the C-70 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between C-70 and Celeron J1800, 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 C-70
C-70
Intel Celeron J1800
Celeron J1800

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.


2.5 96 votes

Rate C-70 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 539 votes

Rate Celeron J1800 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about C-70 or Celeron J1800, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.