Athlon II X2 255 vs Celeron J1900
Aggregate performance score
Athlon II X2 255 outperforms Celeron J1900 by a small 6% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2951 | 2914 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 0.02 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | Intel Celeron | no data |
| Power efficiency | 2.75 | 0.45 |
| Designer | Intel | AMD |
| Architecture codename | Bay Trail-D (2013) | Regor (2009−2013) |
| Release date | 1 November 2013 (12 years ago) | 25 January 2010 (15 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $82 | $60 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
Celeron J1900 and Athlon II X2 255 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 | 4 (Quad-Core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | 2 GHz | 3.1 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.42 GHz | 3.1 GHz |
| L1 cache | 224 KB | 128 KB |
| L2 cache | 2 MB | 1 MB |
| L3 cache | 2 MB L2 Cache | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 22 nm | 45 nm |
| Die size | no data | 117 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 105 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | no data | 410 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron J1900 and Athlon II X2 255 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 | 1 |
| Socket | FCBGA1170 | AM3 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 10 Watt | 65 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron J1900 and Athlon II X2 255. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | no data |
| PAE | 36 Bit | no data |
| FDI | - | no data |
| RST | - | no data |
Security technologies
Celeron J1900 and Athlon II X2 255 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 J1900 and Athlon II X2 255 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | - | no data |
| VT-x | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron J1900 and Athlon II X2 255. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR3 |
| Maximum memory size | 8 GB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 2 | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Intel HD Graphics for Intel Atom Processor Z3700 Series | no data |
| Quick Sync Video | + | - |
| Graphics max frequency | 854 MHz | no data |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Celeron J1900 and Athlon II X2 255 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | 2 | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron J1900 and Athlon II X2 255.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | 2.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 4 | no data |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
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. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.
GeekBench 5 Single-Core
GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.65 | 0.69 |
| Recency | 1 November 2013 | 25 January 2010 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 2 |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 22 nm | 45 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 10 Watt | 65 Watt |
Celeron J1900 has an age advantage of 3 years, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, a 104.5% more advanced lithography process, and 550% lower power consumption.
Athlon II X2 255, on the other hand, has a 6.2% higher aggregate performance score.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Intel Celeron J1900 and AMD Athlon II X2 255.
Be aware that Celeron J1900 is a notebook processor while Athlon II X2 255 is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
