A8-7100 vs Celeron J4005

#ad
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregated performance score

Celeron J4005
2017
2 cores / 2 threads
1.01

A8-7100 outperforms Celeron J4005 by a small 5% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron J4005 and A8-7100 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking23352308
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.54no data
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
SeriesIntel CeleronAMD Kaveri
Architecture codenameGemini Lake (2019)Kaveri (2014−2015)
Release date11 December 2017 (6 years ago)4 June 2014 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$107no data
Current price$355 (3.3x MSRP)$422

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron J4005 and A8-7100 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)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads24
Base clock speed2 GHz1.8 GHz
Boost clock speed2.7 GHz3 GHz
L1 cache112 KBno data
L2 cache4 MB4096 KB
L3 cache4 MBno data
Chip lithography14 nm28 nm
Die sizeno data245 mm2
Maximum core temperature105 °Cno data
Number of transistorsno data2410 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility+-
Unlocked multiplierNoNo

Compatibility

Information on Celeron J4005 and A8-7100 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
SocketFCBGA1090FP3
Power consumption (TDP)10 Watt19 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron J4005 and A8-7100. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.286x SSE (1, 2, 3, 3S, 4.1, 4.2, 4A),-64, AES, AVX, FMA, DDR3-1600 Controller
AES-NI++
FMAno data+
AVXno data+
FRTCno data1
PowerTuneno data-
TrueAudiono data+
PowerNowno data+
PowerGatingno data+
Out-of-band client managementno data+
VirusProtectno data+
HSAno data1
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Speed Shift-no data
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+no data
Smart Response-no data
GPIO+no data
Turbo Boost Max 3.0-no data
StatusDiscontinuedno data

Security technologies

Celeron J4005 and A8-7100 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

EDB+no data
Secure Key+no data
MPX+no data
Identity Protection+no data
SGXYes with Intel® MEno data
OS Guard+no data
Anti-Theft-no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron J4005 and A8-7100 are enumerated here.

AMD-Vno data1
VT-d+no data
VT-x+no data
EPT+no data
IOMMU 2.0no data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron J4005 and A8-7100. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4DDR3-1600
Maximum memory size8 GBno data
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidth38.397 GB/sno data
ECC memory support-no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Intel UHD Graphics 600AMD Radeon R5 Graphics
iGPU core countno data4
Max video memory8 GBno data
Quick Sync Video+no data
Endurono data+
Switchable graphicsno data1
UVDno data+
VCEno data+
Graphics max frequency700 MHzno data
Execution Units12no data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron J4005 and A8-7100 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported3no data
eDP+no data
DisplayPort++
HDMI++
MIPI-DSI+no data

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by Celeron J4005 and A8-7100 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

4K resolution support+no data

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Celeron J4005 and A8-7100 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectX12DirectX® 12
OpenGL4.4no data
Vulkanno data1

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron J4005 and A8-7100.

PCIe version2.03.0
PCI Express lanes6no data
USB revision2.0/3.0no data
Total number of SATA ports2no data
Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Ports2no data
Number of USB ports8no data
Integrated LAN-no data
UART+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.


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 J4005 1.01
A8-7100 1.06
+5%

A8-7100 outperforms Celeron J4005 by 5% based on our aggregated benchmark results.


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%

Celeron J4005 1567
A8-7100 1641
+4.7%

A8-7100 outperforms Celeron J4005 by 5% in Passmark.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 42%

Celeron J4005 347
+15.3%
A8-7100 301

Celeron J4005 outperforms A8-7100 by 15% in GeekBench 5 Single-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.

Benchmark coverage: 42%

Celeron J4005 589
A8-7100 757
+28.5%

A8-7100 outperforms Celeron J4005 by 29% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

Benchmark coverage: 20%

Celeron J4005 2085
+51.2%
A8-7100 1379

Celeron J4005 outperforms A8-7100 by 51% in Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core.

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

Celeron J4005 3500
A8-7100 4134
+18.1%

A8-7100 outperforms Celeron J4005 by 18% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.

wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

Benchmark coverage: 18%

Celeron J4005 33.07
+0.5%
A8-7100 33.23

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

Celeron J4005 1
A8-7100 2
+26.6%

A8-7100 outperforms Celeron J4005 by 27% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core.

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.

Benchmark coverage: 15%

Celeron J4005 144
+8.3%
A8-7100 133

Celeron J4005 outperforms A8-7100 by 8% in Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core.

Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R15 (standing for Release 15) is a benchmark made by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version (sometimes called Single-Thread) only uses a single processor thread to render a room full of reflective spheres and light sources.

Benchmark coverage: 15%

Celeron J4005 77
+75%
A8-7100 44

Celeron J4005 outperforms A8-7100 by 75% in Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core.

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R11.5 is an old benchmark by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version loads a single thread with ray tracing to render a glossy room full of crystal spheres and light sources.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

Celeron J4005 0.85
+54.5%
A8-7100 0.55

Celeron J4005 outperforms A8-7100 by 55% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core.

TrueCrypt AES

TrueCrypt is a discontinued piece of software that was widely used for on-the-fly-encryption of disk partitions, now superseded by VeraCrypt. It contains several embedded performance tests, one of them being TrueCrypt AES, which measures data encryption speed using AES algorithm. Result is encryption speed in gigabytes per second.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

Celeron J4005 1
A8-7100 1.1
+9.4%

A8-7100 outperforms Celeron J4005 by 9% in TrueCrypt AES.

WinRAR 4.0

WinRAR 4.0 is an outdated version of a popular file archiver. It contains an internal speed test, using 'Best' setting of RAR compression on large chunks of randomly generated data. Its results are measured in kilobytes per second.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

Celeron J4005 798
A8-7100 1417
+77.5%

A8-7100 outperforms Celeron J4005 by 78% in WinRAR 4.0.

x264 encoding pass 1

x264 version 4.0 is a video encoding benchmark uses MPEG 4 x264 compression method to compress a sample HD (720p) video. Pass 1 is a faster variant that produces a constant bit rate output file. Its result is measured in frames per second, which means how many frames of the source video file were encoded per second.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

Celeron J4005 50
A8-7100 56
+12.1%

A8-7100 outperforms Celeron J4005 by 12% in x264 encoding pass 1.

x264 encoding pass 2

x264 Pass 2 is a slower variant of x264 video compression that produces a variable bit rate output file, which results in better quality since the higher bit rate is used when it is needed more. Benchmark result is still measured in frames per second.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

Celeron J4005 10
A8-7100 11
+10.9%

A8-7100 outperforms Celeron J4005 by 11% in x264 encoding pass 2.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.01 1.06
Integrated graphics card 0.86
Recency 11 December 2017 4 June 2014
Physical cores 2 4
Threads 2 4
Chip lithography 14 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 10 Watt 19 Watt

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Celeron J4005 and A8-7100.

Note that Celeron J4005 is a desktop processor while A8-7100 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron J4005 and A8-7100, 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 J4005
Celeron J4005
AMD A8-7100
A8-7100

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.


3.1 152 votes

Rate Celeron J4005 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 29 votes

Rate A8-7100 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron J4005 or A8-7100, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.