Athlon Silver 3050U vs Celeron J1800

VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron J1800
2013
2 cores / 2 threads, 10 Watt
0.36
Athlon Silver 3050U
2020
2 cores / 2 threads, 15 Watt
1.88
+422%

Athlon Silver 3050U outperforms Celeron J1800 by a whopping 422% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron J1800 and Athlon Silver 3050U processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking30511986
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel CeleronAMD Picasso (Ryzen 3000 APU)
Power efficiency3.4111.86
Architecture codenameBay Trail-D (2013)Dali (Zen) (2020)
Release date1 November 2013 (11 years ago)6 January 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$72no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron J1800 and Athlon Silver 3050U 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 speed2.41 GHz2.3 GHz
Boost clock speed2.58 GHz3.2 GHz
Multiplierno data23
L1 cache112 KB192 KB
L2 cache1 MB1 MB
L3 cache1 MB L2 Cache4 MB
Chip lithography22 nm14 nm
Maximum core temperature105 °C95 °C
Number of transistorsno data4500 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+

Compatibility

Information on Celeron J1800 and Athlon Silver 3050U 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
SocketFCBGA1170FP5
Power consumption (TDP)10 Watt15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron J1800 and Athlon Silver 3050U. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataMMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, BMI2, ABM, FMA, ADX, SMEP, SMAP, CPB, AES-NI, RDRAND, RDSEED, SHA, SME
AES-NI-+
FMA-+
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
PAE36 Bitno data
FDI-no data
RST-no data
Precision Boost 2no data+

Security technologies

Celeron J1800 and Athlon Silver 3050U 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 J1800 and Athlon Silver 3050U are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
VT-d-no data
VT-x+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron J1800 and Athlon Silver 3050U. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR4
Maximum memory size8 GB32 GB
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidthno data38.397 GB/s
ECC memory support-+

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Intel HD Graphics for Intel Atom Processor Z3700 SeriesAMD Radeon RX Vega 2 ( - 1100 MHz)
Quick Sync Video+-
Graphics max frequency792 MHzno data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron J1800 and Athlon Silver 3050U integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported2no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron J1800 and Athlon Silver 3050U.

PCIe version2.03.0
PCI Express lanes412

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 J1800 0.36
Athlon Silver 3050U 1.88
+422%

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 J1800 573
Athlon Silver 3050U 2983
+421%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.36 1.88
Recency 1 November 2013 6 January 2020
Chip lithography 22 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 10 Watt 15 Watt

Celeron J1800 has 50% lower power consumption.

Athlon Silver 3050U, on the other hand, has a 422.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, and a 57.1% more advanced lithography process.

The Athlon Silver 3050U is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron J1800 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron J1800 and Athlon Silver 3050U, 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 J1800
Celeron J1800
AMD Athlon Silver 3050U
Athlon Silver 3050U

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.


2.8 539 votes

Rate Celeron J1800 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.1 8049 votes

Rate Athlon Silver 3050U on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron J1800 or Athlon Silver 3050U, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.