Ryzen 9 9900X vs Celeron J4105
Aggregate performance score
Ryzen 9 9900X outperforms Celeron J4105 by a whopping 1785% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Celeron J4105 and Ryzen 9 9900X processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 1987 | 107 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 2.24 | 66.71 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Desktop processor |
| Series | Intel Celeron | no data |
| Power efficiency | 17.33 | 27.22 |
| Architecture codename | Goldmont Plus (2017) | Granite Ridge (2024) |
| Release date | 11 December 2017 (6 years ago) | 15 August 2024 (less than a year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $107 | $499 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Ryzen 9 9900X has 2878% better value for money than Celeron J4105.
Detailed specifications
Celeron J4105 and Ryzen 9 9900X 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 | 4 (Quad-Core) | 12 (Dodeca-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 24 |
| Base clock speed | 1.5 GHz | 4.4 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.5 GHz | 5.6 GHz |
| Multiplier | 15 | no data |
| L1 cache | 256 KB | 80 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 4 MB (shared) | 1 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 4 MB | 64 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 4 nm |
| Die size | 93 mm2 | 2x 70.6 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 105 °C | 95 °C |
| Number of transistors | no data | 16,630 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | + | no data |
| Unlocked multiplier | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron J4105 and Ryzen 9 9900X 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 (Uniprocessor) | 1 |
| Socket | FCBGA1090 | AM5 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 10 Watt | 120 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron J4105 and Ryzen 9 9900X. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE4.2 | SMT, AES, AVX, AVX2, AVX512, FMA3, MMX (+), SHA, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, SSE4A |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| 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 |
| Precision Boost 2 | no data | + |
Security technologies
Celeron J4105 and Ryzen 9 9900X technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| EDB | + | no data |
| Secure Key | + | no data |
| MPX | + | - |
| Identity Protection | + | - |
| 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 J4105 and Ryzen 9 9900X are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
| VT-d | + | no data |
| VT-x | + | no data |
| EPT | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron J4105 and Ryzen 9 9900X. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 | DDR5 |
| Maximum memory size | 8 GB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 2 | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 38.397 GB/s | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | Intel UHD Graphics 600 | AMD Radeon Graphics |
| Max video memory | 8 GB | no data |
| Quick Sync Video | + | - |
| Graphics max frequency | 750 MHz | no data |
| Execution Units | 12 | no data |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Celeron J4105 and Ryzen 9 9900X integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | 3 | no data |
| eDP | + | no data |
| DisplayPort | + | - |
| HDMI | + | - |
| MIPI-DSI | + | no data |
Graphics image quality
Maximum display resolutions supported by Celeron J4105 and Ryzen 9 9900X integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.
| 4K resolution support | + | no data |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by Celeron J4105 and Ryzen 9 9900X 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 J4105 and Ryzen 9 9900X.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | 5.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 6 | 24 |
| 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.
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.90 | 35.82 |
| Integrated graphics card | 0.87 | 1.98 |
| Recency | 11 December 2017 | 15 August 2024 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 12 |
| Threads | 4 | 24 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 4 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 10 Watt | 120 Watt |
Celeron J4105 has 1100% lower power consumption.
Ryzen 9 9900X, on the other hand, has a 1785.3% higher aggregate performance score, 127.6% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 6 years, 200% more physical cores and 500% more threads, and a 250% more advanced lithography process.
The Ryzen 9 9900X is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron J4105 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron J4105 and Ryzen 9 9900X, 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.
