Atom N2800 vs Celeron J1900

VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron J1900
2013
4 cores / 4 threads, 10 Watt
0.72
+157%
Atom N2800
2011
2 cores / 4 threads, 6 Watt
0.28

Celeron J1900 outperforms Atom N2800 by a whopping 157% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron J1900 and Atom N2800 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking26983133
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel CeleronIntel Atom
Power efficiency6.813.78
Architecture codenameBay Trail-D (2013)Cedarview-M (2011−2012)
Release date1 November 2013 (11 years ago)1 December 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$82$47

Detailed specifications

Celeron J1900 and Atom N2800 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads44
Base clock speed2 GHz1.86 GHz
Boost clock speed2.42 GHz1.87 GHz
L1 cache224 KB64 KB (per core)
L2 cache2 MB512K (per core)
L3 cache2 MB L2 Cache0 KB
Chip lithography22 nm32 nm
Die sizeno data66 mm2
Maximum core temperature105 °Cno data
Number of transistorsno data176 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Celeron J1900 and Atom N2800 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
SocketFCBGA1170FCBGA559
Power consumption (TDP)10 Watt6.5 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron J1900 and Atom N2800. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE2, Intel® SSE3, Intel® SSSE3
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Turbo Boost Technology--
Hyper-Threading Technology-+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Demand Based Switchingno data-
PAE36 Bitno data
FDI-no data
RST-no data

Security technologies

Celeron J1900 and Atom N2800 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
EDB++
Anti-Theft-no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron J1900 and Atom N2800 are enumerated here.

VT-d--
VT-x+-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron J1900 and Atom N2800. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3
Maximum memory size8 GB4.88 GB
Max memory channels21

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Intel HD Graphics for Intel Atom Processor Z3700 SeriesIntel Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 3650 (640 MHz)
Quick Sync Video+-
Graphics max frequency854 MHzno data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron J1900 and Atom N2800 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported2no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron J1900 and Atom N2800.

PCIe version2.0no data
PCI Express lanes4no 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.


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 J1900 0.72
+157%
Atom N2800 0.28

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 J1900 1149
+159%
Atom N2800 444

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.72 0.28
Recency 1 November 2013 1 December 2011
Physical cores 4 2
Chip lithography 22 nm 32 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 10 Watt 6 Watt

Celeron J1900 has a 157.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, 100% more physical cores, and a 45.5% more advanced lithography process.

Atom N2800, on the other hand, has 66.7% lower power consumption.

The Celeron J1900 is our recommended choice as it beats the Atom N2800 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron J1900 and Atom N2800, 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 J1900
Celeron J1900
Intel Atom N2800
Atom N2800

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.


3.4 196 votes

Rate Celeron J1900 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.7 104 votes

Rate Atom N2800 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron J1900 or Atom N2800, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.