Xeon w7-3445 vs Celeron J1900
Aggregate performance score
Xeon w7-3445 outperforms Celeron J1900 by a whopping 3961% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Celeron J1900 and Xeon w7-3445 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 2637 | 134 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Server |
| Series | Intel Celeron | no data |
| Architecture codename | Bay Trail-D (2013) | Sapphire Rapids (2023) |
| Release date | 1 November 2013 (10 years ago) | 15 February 2023 (1 year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $82 | no data |
Detailed specifications
Celeron J1900 and Xeon w7-3445 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) | 20 (Icosa-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 40 |
| Base clock speed | 2 GHz | 2.6 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.42 GHz | 4.8 GHz |
| L1 cache | 224 KB | 80 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 2 MB | 2 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 2 MB L2 Cache | 52.5 MB |
| Chip lithography | 22 nm | Intel 7 nm |
| Die size | no data | 4x 477 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 105 °C | no data |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 72 °C |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron J1900 and Xeon w7-3445 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 | FCLGA4677 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 10 Watt | 270 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron J1900 and Xeon w7-3445. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® AMX, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512 |
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| vPro | no data | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| Speed Shift | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | 2.0 |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | + |
| TSX | - | + |
| PAE | 36 Bit | no data |
| Turbo Boost Max 3.0 | no data | + |
| FDI | - | no data |
| Status | Launched | Launched |
| RST | - | no data |
| Deep Learning Boost | - | + |
Security technologies
Celeron J1900 and Xeon w7-3445 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | + |
| EDB | + | + |
| SGX | no data | - |
| OS Guard | no data | + |
| Anti-Theft | - | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron J1900 and Xeon w7-3445 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | - | + |
| VT-x | + | + |
| EPT | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron J1900 and Xeon w7-3445. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR5-4800 |
| Maximum memory size | 8 GB | 4 TB |
| Max memory channels | 2 | 8 |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Intel® HD Graphics for Intel Atom® Processor Z3700 Series | N/A |
| Quick Sync Video | + | - |
| Graphics max frequency | 854 MHz | no data |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Celeron J1900 and Xeon w7-3445 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | 2 | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron J1900 and Xeon w7-3445.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | 5.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 4 | 112 |
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.
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.
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 | 0.75 | 30.46 |
| Recency | 1 November 2013 | 15 February 2023 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 20 |
| Threads | 4 | 40 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 10 Watt | 270 Watt |
Celeron J1900 has 2600% lower power consumption.
Xeon w7-3445, on the other hand, has a 3961.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, and 400% more physical cores and 900% more threads.
The Xeon w7-3445 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron J1900 in performance tests.
Be aware that Celeron J1900 is a notebook processor while Xeon w7-3445 is a server/workstation one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron J1900 and Xeon w7-3445, 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.
