FX-8800P vs Celeron J4105

VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron J4105
2017
4 cores / 4 threads, 10 Watt
1.83
+2.2%
FX-8800P
2015
4 cores / 4 threads, 15 Watt
1.79

Celeron J4105 outperforms FX-8800P by a minimal 2% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron J4105 and FX-8800P processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking20102024
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation2.09no data
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
SeriesIntel CeleronAMD Carrizo
Power efficiency17.3211.29
Architecture codenameGoldmont Plus (2017)Carrizo (2015−2018)
Release date11 December 2017 (7 years ago)2 June 2015 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$107no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron J4105 and FX-8800P 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads44
Base clock speed1.5 GHz2.1 GHz
Boost clock speed2.5 GHz3.4 GHz
Multiplier15no data
L1 cache56 KB (per core)no data
L2 cache4 MB (shared)2048 KB
L3 cache4 MBno data
Chip lithography14 nm28 nm
Die size93 mm2250 mm2
Maximum core temperature105 °C90 °C
Number of transistorsno data3,100 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility+-

Compatibility

Information on Celeron J4105 and FX-8800P 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
SocketFCBGA1090FP4
Power consumption (TDP)10 Watt15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron J4105 and FX-8800P. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.2HSA 1.0
AES-NI++
FMA-+
AVX-+
FRTC-+
FreeSync-+
DualGraphics-+
TrueAudio-+
PowerNow-+
PowerGating-+
Out-of-band client management-+
VirusProtect-+
HSA-+
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+-
Smart Response-no data
GPIO+no data
Turbo Boost Max 3.0-no data

Security technologies

Celeron J4105 and FX-8800P technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

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

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron J4105 and FX-8800P are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
VT-d+no data
VT-x+no data
EPT+no data
IOMMU 2.0-+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron J4105 and FX-8800P. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4DDR3-2133
Maximum memory size8 GBno data
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidth38.397 GB/sno data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Intel UHD Graphics 600AMD Radeon R7 Graphics
iGPU core countno data8
Max video memory8 GBno data
Quick Sync Video+-
Enduro-+
Switchable graphics-+
UVD-+
VCE-+
Graphics max frequency750 MHzno data
Execution Units12no data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron J4105 and FX-8800P 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 J4105 and FX-8800P integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

4K resolution support+no data

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Celeron J4105 and FX-8800P integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectX12DirectX® 12
OpenGL4.4no data
Vulkan-+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron J4105 and FX-8800P.

PCIe version2.03.0
PCI Express lanes68
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 J4105 1.83
+2.2%
FX-8800P 1.79

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 J4105 2899
+1.7%
FX-8800P 2851

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 J4105 325
FX-8800P 524
+61.2%

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 J4105 922
FX-8800P 1193
+29.4%

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

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

Celeron J4105 270
FX-8800P 277
+2.6%

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.

Celeron J4105 73
FX-8800P 82
+12.3%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.83 1.79
Recency 11 December 2017 2 June 2015
Chip lithography 14 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 10 Watt 15 Watt

Celeron J4105 has a 2.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 50% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Celeron J4105 and FX-8800P.

Note that Celeron J4105 is a desktop processor while FX-8800P is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron J4105 and FX-8800P, 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 J4105
Celeron J4105
AMD FX-8800P
FX-8800P

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.


3.3 311 votes

Rate Celeron J4105 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 102 votes

Rate FX-8800P on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron J4105 or FX-8800P, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.