Celeron J1800 vs E1-6010

VS

Aggregate performance score

E1-6010
2014
2 cores / 2 threads, 10 Watt
0.34
Celeron J1800
2013
2 cores / 2 threads, 10 Watt
0.36
+5.9%

Celeron J1800 outperforms E1-6010 by a small 6% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing E1-6010 and Celeron J1800 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking30813051
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD E-SeriesIntel Celeron
Power efficiency3.223.41
Architecture codenameBeema (2014)Bay Trail-D (2013)
Release date29 April 2014 (10 years ago)1 November 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$72

Detailed specifications

E1-6010 and Celeron J1800 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 speedno data2.41 GHz
Boost clock speed1.35 GHz2.58 GHz
L1 cacheno data112 KB
L2 cache1024 KB1 MB
L3 cacheno data1 MB L2 Cache
Chip lithography28 nm22 nm
Die size107 mm2no data
Maximum core temperatureno data105 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)90 °Cno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on E1-6010 and Celeron J1800 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
SocketFT3bFCBGA1170
Power consumption (TDP)10 Watt10 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by E1-6010 and Celeron J1800. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensions86x SSE (1, 2, 3, 3S, 4.1, 4.2, 4A),-64, AES, AVXno data
AES-NI+-
FMAFMA4-
AVX+-
PowerNow+-
PowerGating+-
VirusProtect+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
PAEno data36 Bit
FDIno data-
RSTno data-

Security technologies

E1-6010 and Celeron J1800 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

EDBno data+
Anti-Theftno data-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by E1-6010 and Celeron J1800 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-dno data-
VT-xno data+
IOMMU 2.0+-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by E1-6010 and Celeron J1800. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3
Maximum memory sizeno data8 GB
Max memory channels12

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon R2 GraphicsIntel HD Graphics for Intel Atom Processor Z3700 Series
Quick Sync Video-+
Enduro+-
Switchable graphics+-
UVD+-
VCE+-
Graphics max frequencyno data792 MHz

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of E1-6010 and Celeron J1800 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data2
DisplayPort+-
HDMI+-

Graphics API support

APIs supported by E1-6010 and Celeron J1800 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXDirectX® 12no data
Vulkan+-

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by E1-6010 and Celeron J1800.

PCIe version2.02.0
PCI Express lanes84

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.

E1-6010 0.34
Celeron J1800 0.36
+5.9%

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.

E1-6010 534
Celeron J1800 574
+7.5%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.34 0.36
Recency 29 April 2014 1 November 2013
Chip lithography 28 nm 22 nm

E1-6010 has an age advantage of 5 months.

Celeron J1800, on the other hand, has a 5.9% higher aggregate performance score, and a 27.3% more advanced lithography process.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between E1-6010 and Celeron J1800.


Should you still have questions on choice between E1-6010 and Celeron J1800, 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.


AMD E1-6010
E1-6010
Intel Celeron J1800
Celeron J1800

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.


2.3 562 votes

Rate E1-6010 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 539 votes

Rate Celeron J1800 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about E1-6010 or Celeron J1800, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.