Core 2 Duo L7400 vs Celeron J4005
Primary Details
Comparing Celeron J4005 and Core 2 Duo L7400 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 2326 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation | 0.55 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | Intel Celeron | no data |
| Architecture codename | Gemini Lake (2019) | no data |
| Release date | 11 December 2017 (6 years ago) | 1 July 2006 (17 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $107 | no data |
| Current price | $355 (3.3x MSRP) | no data |
Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed Specifications
Celeron J4005 and Core 2 Duo L7400 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 | 2 (Dual-core) | no data |
| Threads | 2 | no data |
| Base clock speed | 2 GHz | 1.5 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.7 GHz | no data |
| L1 cache | 112 KB | no data |
| L2 cache | 4 MB | no data |
| L3 cache | 4 MB | 4 MB L2 Cache |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 65 nm |
| Maximum core temperature | 105 °C | 100 °C |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | + | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
| VID voltage range | no data | 0.9V-1.1V |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron J4005 and Core 2 Duo L7400 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 | no data |
| Socket | FCBGA1090 | PBGA479 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 10 Watt | 17 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron J4005 and Core 2 Duo L7400. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE4.2 | no data |
| AES-NI | + | no data |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| Speed Shift | - | no data |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | - |
| Idle States | + | - |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | no data |
| Smart Response | - | no data |
| Demand Based Switching | no data | - |
| GPIO | + | no data |
| Turbo Boost Max 3.0 | - | no data |
| FSB parity | no data | - |
| Status | Discontinued | Discontinued |
Security technologies
Celeron J4005 and Core 2 Duo L7400 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | - |
| EDB | + | + |
| Secure Key | + | no data |
| MPX | + | no data |
| Identity Protection | + | no data |
| SGX | Yes with Intel® ME | no data |
| OS Guard | + | no data |
| Anti-Theft | - | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron J4005 and Core 2 Duo L7400 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | + | no data |
| VT-x | + | + |
| EPT | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron J4005 and Core 2 Duo L7400. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4, DDR4 | no data |
| Maximum memory size | 8 GB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 2 | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 38.397 GB/s | no data |
| ECC memory support | - | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Intel UHD Graphics 600 | no data |
| Max video memory | 8 GB | no data |
| Quick Sync Video | + | no data |
| Graphics max frequency | 700 MHz | no data |
| Execution Units | 12 | no data |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Celeron J4005 and Core 2 Duo L7400 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | 3 | no data |
| eDP | + | no data |
| DisplayPort | + | no data |
| HDMI | + | no data |
| MIPI-DSI | + | no data |
Graphics image quality
Maximum display resolutions supported by Celeron J4005 and Core 2 Duo L7400 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.
| 4K resolution support | + | no data |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by Celeron J4005 and Core 2 Duo L7400 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | 12 | no data |
| OpenGL | 4.4 | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron J4005 and Core 2 Duo L7400.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | no data |
| PCI Express lanes | 6 | no data |
| USB revision | 2.0/3.0 | no data |
| Total number of SATA ports | 2 | no data |
| Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Ports | 2 | no data |
| Number of USB ports | 8 | no 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.
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 outperforms Core 2 Duo L7400 by 204% in Passmark.
Pros & Cons Summary
| Recency | 11 December 2017 | 1 July 2006 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 65 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 10 Watt | 17 Watt |
We couldn't decide between Celeron J4005 and Core 2 Duo L7400. We've got no test results to judge.
Note that Celeron J4005 is a desktop processor while Core 2 Duo L7400 is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron J4005 and Core 2 Duo L7400, 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.
