Pentium 4 2.4 GHz vs Celeron J4115
Primary details
Comparing Celeron J4115 and Pentium 4 2.4 GHz processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 1946 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.78 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Desktop processor |
| Series | Intel Gemini Lake | Pentium 4 |
| Architecture codename | Gemini Lake (2019) | Northwood (2001−2004) |
| Release date | 4 November 2019 (4 years ago) | no data |
| Current price | $888 | $14.98 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Celeron J4115 and Pentium 4 2.4 GHz 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) | 1 (Single-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 1 |
| Base clock speed | 1.8 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 2.5 GHz | 2.4 GHz |
| Bus support | no data | 400 MHz |
| L2 cache | 4 MB | no data |
| L3 cache | 4 MB | no data |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 130 nm |
| Maximum core temperature | 105 °C | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | - |
| Windows 11 compatibility | + | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron J4115 and Pentium 4 2.4 GHz 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 | no data |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 10 Watt | 59.8 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron J4115 and Pentium 4 2.4 GHz. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE4.2 | no data |
| AES-NI | + | no data |
| vPro | - | no data |
| 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 | + | no data |
| Smart Response | - | no data |
| GPIO | + | no data |
| Turbo Boost Max 3.0 | - | no data |
| Status | Launched | no data |
Security technologies
Celeron J4115 and Pentium 4 2.4 GHz technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| EDB | + | no data |
| 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 J4115 and Pentium 4 2.4 GHz are enumerated here.
| VT-d | + | no data |
| VT-x | + | no data |
| EPT | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron J4115 and Pentium 4 2.4 GHz. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 | no data |
| Maximum memory size | 8 GB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 2 | 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 | 750 MHz | no data |
| Execution Units | 12 | no data |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Celeron J4115 and Pentium 4 2.4 GHz 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 J4115 and Pentium 4 2.4 GHz integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.
| 4K resolution support | + | no data |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by Celeron J4115 and Pentium 4 2.4 GHz 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 J4115 and Pentium 4 2.4 GHz.
| 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 J4115 outperforms Pentium 4 2.4 GHz by 1951% in Passmark.
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 J4115 outperforms Pentium 4 2.4 GHz by 60% in Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core.
3DMark06 CPU
3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.
Benchmark coverage: 19%
Celeron J4115 outperforms Pentium 4 2.4 GHz by 482% in 3DMark06 CPU.
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%
Pentium 4 2.4 GHz outperforms Celeron J4115 by 597% in wPrime 32.
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 J4115 outperforms Pentium 4 2.4 GHz by 2733% in TrueCrypt AES.
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 J4115 outperforms Pentium 4 2.4 GHz by 831% in x264 encoding pass 2.
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 J4115 outperforms Pentium 4 2.4 GHz by 667% in x264 encoding pass 1.
Pros & cons summary
| Physical cores | 4 | 1 |
| Threads | 4 | 1 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 130 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 10 Watt | 59 Watt |
We couldn't decide between Celeron J4115 and Pentium 4 2.4 GHz. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron J4115 and Pentium 4 2.4 GHz, 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.
