A4-9120C vs Celeron J1750
Primary details
Comparing Celeron J1750 and A4-9120C processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | not rated | 2755 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | Intel Celeron | AMD Bristol Ridge |
| Architecture codename | Bay Trail-D (2013) | Stoney Ridge (2016−2019) |
| Release date | 1 September 2013 (10 years ago) | 6 January 2019 (5 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $72 | no data |
| Current price | $200 (2.8x MSRP) | $290 |
Detailed specifications
Celeron J1750 and A4-9120C 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 cores | 2 (Dual-core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 2 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 1.6 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.41 GHz | 2.4 GHz |
| L1 cache | 112 KB | 160 KB |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 1 MB |
| Chip lithography | 22 nm | 28 nm |
| Die size | no data | 124.5 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | no data | 1200 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron J1750 and A4-9120C 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 configuration | 1 | no data |
| Socket | no data | BGA |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 10 Watt | 6 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron J1750 and A4-9120C. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | Single-Channel DDR4-2133, Virtualization, |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron J1750 and A4-9120C are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron J1750 and A4-9120C. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR4 |
| ECC memory support | - | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | Intel HD Graphics | AMD Radeon R4 (Stoney Ridge) |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron J1750 and A4-9120C.
| PCI Express lanes | 4 | no 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.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 68%
A4-9120C outperforms Celeron J1750 by 37% in Passmark.
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 1 September 2013 | 6 January 2019 |
| Chip lithography | 22 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 10 Watt | 6 Watt |
Celeron J1750 has a 27.3% more advanced lithography process.
A4-9120C, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 5 years, and 66.7% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Celeron J1750 and A4-9120C. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron J1750 and A4-9120C, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
