Celeron J1800 vs FX-4170

VS

Aggregate performance score

FX-4170
2012
4 cores / 4 threads, 125 Watt
1.91
+431%
Celeron J1800
2013
2 cores / 2 threads, 10 Watt
0.36

FX-4170 outperforms Celeron J1800 by a whopping 431% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing FX-4170 and Celeron J1800 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking19613036
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
Seriesno dataIntel Celeron
Power efficiency1.453.41
Architecture codenameZambezi (2011−2012)Bay Trail-D (2013)
Release date27 February 2012 (12 years ago)1 November 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$72

Detailed specifications

FX-4170 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads42
Base clock speed4.2 GHz2.41 GHz
Boost clock speed4.3 GHz2.58 GHz
L1 cache192 KB112 KB
L2 cache4096 KB1 MB
L3 cache8192 KB1 MB L2 Cache
Chip lithography32 nm22 nm
Die size315 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature61 °C105 °C
Number of transistors1,200 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
P0 Vcore voltageMin: 1.1875 V - Max: 1.4125 Vno data

Compatibility

Information on FX-4170 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
SocketAM3+FCBGA1170
Power consumption (TDP)125 Watt10 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-4170 and Celeron J1800. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI+-
FMA+-
AVX+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
PAEno data36 Bit
FDIno data-
RSTno data-

Security technologies

FX-4170 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 FX-4170 and Celeron J1800 are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-4170 and Celeron J1800. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3
Maximum memory sizeno data8 GB
Max memory channelsno data2

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataIntel HD Graphics for Intel Atom Processor Z3700 Series
Quick Sync Video-+
Graphics max frequencyno data792 MHz

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of FX-4170 and Celeron J1800 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data2

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FX-4170 and Celeron J1800.

PCIe versionn/a2.0
PCI Express lanesno data4

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.

FX-4170 1.91
+431%
Celeron J1800 0.36

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.

FX-4170 3034
+429%
Celeron J1800 573

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.91 0.36
Recency 27 February 2012 1 November 2013
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Chip lithography 32 nm 22 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 125 Watt 10 Watt

FX-4170 has a 430.6% higher aggregate performance score, and 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.

Celeron J1800, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, a 45.5% more advanced lithography process, and 1150% lower power consumption.

The FX-4170 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron J1800 in performance tests.

Note that FX-4170 is a desktop processor while Celeron J1800 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between FX-4170 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 FX-4170
FX-4170
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.


4.4 80 votes

Rate FX-4170 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 534 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 FX-4170 or Celeron J1800, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.