Intel Celeron J4005 vs J4025

#ad
Buy
VS
#ad
Buy

Combined performance score

Celeron J4025
0.99

J4005 outperforms J4025 by 4% in our combined benchmark results.

General info

Comparing Celeron J4025 and Celeron J4005 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking23302300
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Value for money0.740.61
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Seriesno dataIntel Celeron
Architecture codenameGemini Lake Refresh (2019)Gemini Lake (2019)
Release date4 November 2019 (4 years old)11 December 2017 (6 years old)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$107
Current price$587 $355 (3.3x MSRP)
Value for money

Performance per price, higher is better.

Celeron J4025 has 21% better value for money than Celeron J4005.

Technical specs

Celeron J4025 and Celeron J4005 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 GHz
Boost clock speed2.9 GHz2.7 GHz
L1 cacheno data112 KB
L2 cache4 MB4 MB
L3 cache4 MB4 MB
Chip lithography14 nm14 nm
Maximum core temperature105 °C105 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility++
Unlocked multiplierNoNo

Compatibility

Information on Celeron J4025 and Celeron J4005 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
SocketFCBGA1090FCBGA1090
Power consumption (TDP)10 Watt10 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron J4025 and Celeron J4005. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.2Intel® SSE4.2
AES-NI++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Speed Shift--
Turbo Boost Technology--
Hyper-Threading Technology--
Idle States++
Thermal Monitoring++
Smart Response--
GPIO++
Turbo Boost Max 3.0--
StatusDiscontinuedDiscontinued

Security technologies

Celeron J4025 and Celeron J4005 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

EDB++
Secure Key++
MPX++
Identity Protection++
SGXYes with Intel® MEYes with Intel® ME
OS Guard++
Anti-Theft--

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron J4025 and Celeron J4005 are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron J4025 and Celeron J4005. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4, DDR4upto-2400
Maximum memory size8 GB8 GB
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidthno data38.397 GB/s
ECC memory support--

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel UHD Graphics 600Intel UHD Graphics 600
Max video memory8 GB8 GB
Quick Sync Video++
Graphics max frequency700 MHz700 MHz
Execution Units1212

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron J4025 and Celeron J4005 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported33
eDP++
DisplayPort++
HDMI++
MIPI-DSI++

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by Celeron J4025 and Celeron J4005 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

4K resolution support++
Max resolution over HDMI 1.44096x2160@30Hzno data
Max resolution over eDP4096x2160@60Hzno data
Max resolution over DisplayPort4096x2160@60Hzno data

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Celeron J4025 and Celeron J4005 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectX1212
OpenGL4.44.4

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron J4025 and Celeron J4005.

PCIe version2.02.0
PCI Express lanes66
USB revision2.0/3.02.0/3.0
Total number of SATA ports22
Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Ports22
Number of USB ports88
Integrated LAN--
UART++

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 J4025 0.99
Celeron J4005 1.03
+4%

J4005 outperforms J4025 by 4% in our combined 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 J4025 1526
Celeron J4005 1588
+4.1%

J4005 outperforms J4025 by 4% 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 J4025 348
+0.3%
Celeron J4005 347

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 J4025 561
Celeron J4005 583
+3.9%

J4005 outperforms J4025 by 4% 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 J4025 2337
+12.1%
Celeron J4005 2085

J4025 outperforms J4005 by 12% 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 J4025 4556
+30.2%
Celeron J4005 3500

J4025 outperforms J4005 by 30% 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 J4025 31.07
+6.4%
Celeron J4005 33.07

J4005 outperforms J4025 by 6% in wPrime 32.

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 J4025 2
+30.2%
Celeron J4005 1

J4025 outperforms J4005 by 30% 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 J4025 148
+2.8%
Celeron J4005 144

J4025 outperforms J4005 by 3% 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 J4025 77
Celeron J4005 77

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 J4025 0.96
+12.9%
Celeron J4005 0.85

J4025 outperforms J4005 by 13% 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 J4025 1
+4.2%
Celeron J4005 1

J4025 outperforms J4005 by 4% 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 J4025 783
Celeron J4005 798
+1.9%

J4005 outperforms J4025 by 2% 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 J4025 53
+6.4%
Celeron J4005 50

J4025 outperforms J4005 by 6% 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 J4025 11
+6.4%
Celeron J4005 10

J4025 outperforms J4005 by 6% in x264 encoding pass 2.

Gaming performance

Advantages and disadvantages


Performance score 0.99 1.03
Recency 4 November 2019 11 December 2017

We couldn't decide between Celeron J4025 and Celeron J4005. The differences in performance seem too small.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron J4025 and Celeron J4005, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

User ratings

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


Intel Celeron J4025
Celeron J4025
Intel Celeron J4005
Celeron J4005

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.

User ratings: view and submit

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


3.5 93 votes

Rate Intel Celeron J4025 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 139 votes

Rate Intel Celeron J4005 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions and comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron J4025 or Celeron J4005, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.