Celeron G1610 vs J4005

VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron J4005
2017
2 cores / 2 threads, 10 Watt
0.98
+2.1%
Celeron G1610
2012
2 cores / 2 threads, 55 Watt
0.96

Celeron J4005 outperforms Celeron G1610 by a minimal 2% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron J4005 and Celeron G1610 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking24752496
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.030.03
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
SeriesIntel Celeronno data
Power efficiency9.271.65
Architecture codenameGoldmont Plus (2017)Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)
Release date11 December 2017 (6 years ago)3 December 2012 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$107$388

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Celeron J4005 has 3333% better value for money than Celeron G1610.

Detailed specifications

Celeron J4005 and Celeron G1610 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 GHz2.6 GHz
Boost clock speed2.7 GHz2.6 GHz
Bus rateno data5 GT/s
Multiplier20no data
L1 cache112 KB64 KB (per core)
L2 cache4 MB (shared)256 KB (per core)
L3 cache4 MB2 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm22 nm
Die size93 mm294 mm2
Maximum core temperature105 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data65 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility+-

Compatibility

Information on Celeron J4005 and Celeron G1610 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 configuration1 (Uniprocessor)1
SocketFCBGA1090FCLGA1155
Power consumption (TDP)10 Watt55 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron J4005 and Celeron G1610. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.2Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2
AES-NI+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Speed Shift-no data
My WiFino data-
Turbo Boost Technology--
Hyper-Threading Technology--
Idle States++
Thermal Monitoring++
Smart Response-no data
GPIO+no data
Turbo Boost Max 3.0-no data

Security technologies

Celeron J4005 and Celeron G1610 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

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

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron J4005 and Celeron G1610 are enumerated here.

VT-d+-
VT-x++
EPT++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron J4005 and Celeron G1610. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4DDR3
Maximum memory size8 GB32 GB
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidth38.397 GB/s21 GB/s
ECC memory support-+

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel UHD Graphics 600Intel® HD Graphics for 3rd Generation Intel® Processors
Max video memory8 GBno data
Quick Sync Video+-
Graphics max frequency700 MHz1.05 GHz
Execution Units12no data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron J4005 and Celeron G1610 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported33
eDP+no data
DisplayPort+-
HDMI+-
MIPI-DSI+no data

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by Celeron J4005 and Celeron G1610 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

4K resolution support+no data

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Celeron J4005 and Celeron G1610 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectX12no data
OpenGL4.4no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron J4005 and Celeron G1610.

PCIe version2.02.0
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 0.98
+2.1%
Celeron G1610 0.96

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 J4005 1553
+2.2%
Celeron G1610 1519

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.

Celeron J4005 343
Celeron G1610 411
+19.8%

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.

Celeron J4005 578
Celeron G1610 683
+18.2%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.98 0.96
Recency 11 December 2017 3 December 2012
Chip lithography 14 nm 22 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 10 Watt 55 Watt

Celeron J4005 has a 2.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 57.1% more advanced lithography process, and 450% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Celeron J4005 and Celeron G1610.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron J4005 and Celeron G1610, 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
Intel Celeron G1610
Celeron G1610

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.


3.1 165 votes

Rate Celeron J4005 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 235 votes

Rate Celeron G1610 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron J4005 or Celeron G1610, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.