N3150 vs j1900: Intel Celeron J1900 vs N3150

Intel Celeron N3150 vs Intel Celeron J1900








Intel Celeron N3150 vs Intel Celeron J1900

Comparison of the technical characteristics between the processors, with the Intel Celeron N3150 on one side and the Intel Celeron J1900 on the other side. The first is dedicated to the entry-level notebook sector, It has 4 cores, 4 threads, a maximum frequency of 2,1GHz. The second is used on the mini desktop segment, it has a total of 4 cores, 4 threads, its turbo frequency is set to 2,4 GHz. The following table also compares the lithography, the number of transistors (if indicated), the amount of cache memory, the maximum RAM memory capacity, the type of memory accepted, the release date, the maximum number of PCIe lanes, the values ​​obtained in Geekbench 4 and Cinebench R15.

Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above.

This page contains references to products from one or more of our advertisers. We may receive compensation when you click on links to those products. For an explanation of our advertising policy, please visit this page.

Specifications:

Processor

Intel Celeron N3150

Intel Celeron J1900
Market (main)

Entry-level notebook

Mini desktop
ISA

x86-64 (64 bit)

x86-64 (64 bit)
Microarchitecture

Airmont

Silvermont
Core name

Braswell

Bay Trail-D
Family

Celeron N3000

Celeron 1000
Part number(s), S-Spec

FH8066501715913,

FH8066501715924,

SR29F, SR2A8

FH8065301615009,

FH8065301615010,

QG9B, SR1SC, SR1UT

Release date

Q1 2015

Q4 2013
Lithography

14 nm

22 nm
Cores

4

4
Threads

4

4
Base frequency

1,6 GHz

2,0 GHz
Turbo frequency

2,1 GHz

2,4 GHz
Cache memory

2 MB

2 MB
Max memory capacity

8 GB

8 GB
Memory types

DDR3L-1600

DDR3L 1333
Max # of memory channels

2

2
Max memory bandwidth

25,6 GB/s

21,3 GB/s
Max PCIe lanes

4

4
TDP

6 W

10 W
GPU integrated graphics

Intel HD Graphics (Braswell)

Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail)
GPU execution units

12

4
GPU shading units

96

32
GPU base clock

320 MHz

688 MHz
GPU boost clock

640 MHz

854 MHz
GPU FP32 floating point

96 GFLOPS

42,69 GFLOPS
Socket

BGA1170

BGA1170
Compatible motherboard

Socket
BGA 1170 Motherboard 

Maximum temperature

90°C

105°C
CPU-Z single thread

33

90
CPU-Z multi thread

136

357
Cinebench R15 single thread

30

40
Cinebench R15 multi-thread

122

145
Cinebench R20 single thread

71

80
Cinebench R20 multi-thread

189

280
PassMark single thread

563

641
PassMark CPU Mark

1. 185

1.123
(Windows 64-bit)
Geekbench 4 single core

980

1.111
(Windows 64-bit)
Geekbench 4 multi-core

2.734

3.007
(Windows)
Geekbench 5 single core

200

254
(Windows)
Geekbench 5 multi-core

664

658
(SGEMM)
GFLOPS performance

23,38 GFLOPS

25,12 GFLOPS
(Multi-core / watt performance)
Performance / watt ratio

456 pts / W

301 pts / W
Amazon


eBay


Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above.

We can better compare what are the technical differences between the two processors.

Suggested PSU: We assume that we have An ATX computer case, a high end graphics card, 16GB RAM, a 512GB SSD, a 1TB HDD hard drive, a Blu-Ray drive. We will have to rely on a more powerful power supply if we want to have several graphics cards, several monitors, more memory, etc.

Price: For technical reasons, we cannot currently display a price less than 24 hours, or a real-time price. This is why we prefer for the moment not to show a price. You should refer to the respective online stores for the latest price, as well as availability.

We see that the two processors have an equivalent number of cores, the turbo frequency of Intel Celeron J1900 is bigger, that the PDT of Intel Celeron N3150 is lower. The Intel Celeron N3150 was designed earlier.

Performances :

Performance comparison between the two processors, for this we consider the results generated on benchmark software such as Geekbench 4.





CPU-Z — Multi-thread & single thread score
Intel Celeron J1900

90

357
Intel Celeron N3150

33

136

In single core, the difference is 173%. In multi-core, the difference in terms of gap is 163%.

Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.

CPU-Z is a system information software that provides the name of the processor, its model number, the codename, the cache levels, the package, the process. It can also gives data about the mainboard, the memory. It makes real time measurement, with finally a benchmark for the single thread, as well as for the multi thread.





Cinebench R15 — Multi-thread & single thread score
Intel Celeron J1900

40

145
Intel Celeron N3150

30

122

In single core, the difference is 33%. In multi-core, the difference in terms of gap is 19%.

Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.

Cinebench R15 evaluates the performance of CPU calculations by restoring a photorealistic 3D scene. The scene has 2,000 objects, 300,000 polygons, uses sharp and fuzzy reflections, bright areas, shadows, procedural shaders, antialiasing, and so on. The faster the rendering of the scene is created, the more powerful the PC is, with a high number of points.





Cinebench R20 — Multi-thread & single thread score
Intel Celeron J1900

80

280
Intel Celeron N3150

71

189

In single core, the difference is 13%. In multi-core, the difference in terms of gap is 48%.

Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.

Cinebench R20 is a multi-platform test software which allows to evaluate the hardware capacities of a device such as a computer, a tablet, a server. This version of Cinebench takes into account recent developments in processors with multiple cores and the latest improvements in rendering techniques. The evaluation is ultimately even more relevant.





PassMark — CPU Mark & single thread
Intel Celeron N3150

563

1.185
Intel Celeron J1900

641

1.123

In single core, the difference is -12%. In multi-core, the differential gap is 6%.

Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.

PassMark is a benchmarking software that performs several performance tests including prime numbers, integers, floating point, compression, physics, extended instructions, encoding, sorting. The higher the score is, the higher is the device capacity.

On Windows 64-bit:





Geekbench 4 — Multi-core & single core score — Windows 64-bit
Intel Celeron J1900

1.111

3.007
Intel Celeron N3150

980

2.734

In single core, the difference is 13%. In multi-core, the difference in terms of gap is 10%.

On Linux 64-bit:





Geekbench 4 — Multi-core & single core score — Linux 64-bit
Intel Celeron J1900

1.061

2.737
Intel Celeron N3150

954

2.696

In single core, the difference is 11%. In multi-core, the difference in terms of gap is 2%.

On Android 64-bit:





Geekbench 4 — Multi-core & single core score — Android 64-bit
Intel Celeron J1900

1.230

3.203
Intel Celeron N3150

1.034

3.043

In single core, the difference is 19%. In multi-core, the difference in terms of gap is 5%.

Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.

Geekbench 4 is a complete benchmark platform with several types of tests, including data compression, images, AES encryption, SQL encoding, HTML, PDF file rendering, matrix computation, Fast Fourier Transform, 3D object simulation, photo editing, memory testing. This allows us to better visualize the respective power of these devices. For each result, we took an average of 250 values on the famous benchmark software.

On Windows:





Geekbench 5 — Multi-core & single core score — Windows
Intel Celeron N3150

200

664
Intel Celeron J1900

254

658

In single core, the difference is -21%. In multi-core, the differential gap is 1%.

On Linux:





Geekbench 5 — Multi-core & single core score — Linux
Intel Celeron N3150

211

723
Intel Celeron J1900

222

679

In single core, the difference is -5%. In multi-core, the differential gap is 6%.

On Android:





Geekbench 5 — Multi-core & single core score — Android
Intel Celeron J1900

218

760
Intel Celeron N3150

202

690

In single core, the difference is 8%. In multi-core, the difference in terms of gap is 10%.

Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.

Geekbench 5 is a software for measuring the performance of a computer system, for fixed devices, mobile devices, servers. This platform makes it possible to better compare the power of the CPU, the computing power and to compare it with similar or totally different systems. Geekbench 5 includes new workloads that represent work tasks and applications that we can find in reality.

Equivalence:

Intel Celeron N3150 AMD equivalentIntel Celeron J1900 AMD equivalent

Intel Celeron N3150 vs Intel Celeron J1900


Comparative analysis of Intel Celeron N3150 and Intel Celeron J1900 processors for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Performance, Memory, Graphics, Graphics interfaces, Graphics API support, Compatibility, Peripherals, Security & Reliability, Advanced Technologies, Virtualization.
Benchmark processor performance analysis: PassMark — Single thread mark, PassMark — CPU mark, Geekbench 4 — Single Core, Geekbench 4 — Multi-Core, CompuBench 1. 5 Desktop — Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Fps).

Intel Celeron N3150

Buy on Amazon


vs

Intel Celeron J1900

Buy on Amazon

 

Differences

Reasons to consider the Intel Celeron N3150

  • CPU is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 5 month(s) later
  • A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor: 14 nm vs 22 nm
  • Around 67% lower typical power consumption: 6 Watt vs 10 Watt
  • Around 5% better performance in PassMark — CPU mark: 1204 vs 1143
  • Around 54% better performance in CompuBench 1. 5 Desktop — Face Detection (mPixels/s): 4.724 vs 3.068
  • 3.5x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — T-Rex (Frames/s): 0.484 vs 0.139
  • 10x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Video Composition (Frames/s): 5.104 vs 0.508
  • Around 46% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Frames): 1471 vs 1007
  • Around 46% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Fps): 1471 vs 1007










Launch date 1 April 2015 vs 1 November 2013
Manufacturing process technology 14 nm vs 22 nm
Thermal Design Power (TDP) 6 Watt vs 10 Watt
PassMark — CPU mark 1204 vs 1143
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Face Detection (mPixels/s) 4. 724 vs 3.068
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — T-Rex (Frames/s) 0.484 vs 0.139
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Video Composition (Frames/s) 5.104 vs 0.508
GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Frames) 1471 vs 1007
GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Fps) 1471 vs 1007

Reasons to consider the Intel Celeron J1900

  • Around 16% higher clock speed: 2.42 GHz vs 2.08 GHz
  • Around 17% higher maximum core temperature: 105°C vs 90°C
  • Around 13% better performance in PassMark — Single thread mark: 651 vs 574
  • Around 9% better performance in Geekbench 4 — Single Core: 210 vs 192
  • Around 5% better performance in Geekbench 4 — Multi-Core: 686 vs 655
  • Around 38% better performance in CompuBench 1. 5 Desktop — Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 11.336 vs 8.191
  • Around 27% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 1.753 vs 1.375








Maximum frequency 2.42 GHz vs 2.08 GHz
Maximum core temperature 105°C vs 90°C
PassMark — Single thread mark 651 vs 574
Geekbench 4 — Single Core 210 vs 192
Geekbench 4 — Multi-Core 686 vs 655
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) 11.336 vs 8.191
CompuBench 1. 5 Desktop — Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) 1.753 vs 1.375

Compare benchmarks


CPU 1: Intel Celeron N3150
CPU 2: Intel Celeron J1900












PassMark — Single thread mark

CPU 1
CPU 2


PassMark — CPU mark

CPU 1
CPU 2


Geekbench 4 — Single Core

CPU 1
CPU 2


Geekbench 4 — Multi-Core

CPU 1
CPU 2


CompuBench 1. 5 Desktop — Face Detection (mPixels/s)

CPU 1
CPU 2


CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)

CPU 1
CPU 2

11.336

CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — T-Rex (Frames/s)

CPU 1
CPU 2


CompuBench 1. 5 Desktop — Video Composition (Frames/s)

CPU 1
CPU 2


CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)

CPU 1
CPU 2


GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Frames)

CPU 1
CPU 2


GFXBench 4. 0 — T-Rex (Fps)

CPU 1
CPU 2














Name Intel Celeron N3150 Intel Celeron J1900
PassMark — Single thread mark 574 651
PassMark — CPU mark 1204 1143
Geekbench 4 — Single Core 192 210
Geekbench 4 — Multi-Core 655 686
CompuBench 1. 5 Desktop — Face Detection (mPixels/s) 4.724 3.068
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) 8.191 11.336
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — T-Rex (Frames/s) 0.484 0.139
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Video Composition (Frames/s) 5.104 0.508
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) 1.375 1.753
GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) 501
GFXBench 4. 0 — Manhattan (Frames) 875
GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Frames) 1471 1007
GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) 501
GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Fps) 875
GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Fps) 1471 1007

Compare specifications (specs)























































Intel Celeron N3150 Intel Celeron J1900
Architecture codename Braswell Bay Trail
Launch date 1 April 2015 1 November 2013
Launch price (MSRP) $107 $82
Place in performance rating 2197 2569
Processor Number N3150 J1900
Series Intel® Celeron® Processor N Series Intel® Celeron® Processor J Series
Status Discontinued Launched
Vertical segment Mobile Desktop
64 bit support
Base frequency 1. 60 GHz 2.00 GHz
L2 cache 2 MB 2 MB
Manufacturing process technology 14 nm 22 nm
Maximum core temperature 90°C 105°C
Maximum frequency 2.08 GHz 2.42 GHz
Number of cores 4 4
Number of threads 4 4
L1 cache

224 KB
Max memory channels 2 2
Maximum memory size 8 GB 8 GB
Supported memory types DDR3L-1600 DDR3L 1333
Execution Units 12
Graphics base frequency 320 MHz 688 MHz
Graphics max frequency 640 MHz 854 MHz
Intel® Clear Video HD technology
Intel® Clear Video technology
Intel® InTru™ 3D technology
Intel® Quick Sync Video
Max video memory 8 GB
Processor graphics Intel HD Graphics Intel HD Graphics
Graphics max dynamic frequency

854 MHz
Intel® Flexible Display Interface (Intel® FDI)

DisplayPort
eDP
HDMI
Number of displays supported 3 2
Wireless Display (WiDi) support
DirectX Yes
OpenGL Yes
Low Halogen Options Available
Max number of CPUs in a configuration 1 1
Package Size 25mm x 27mm 25mm X 27mm
Scenario Design Power (SDP) 4 W
Sockets supported FCBGA1170 FCBGA1170
Thermal Design Power (TDP) 6 Watt 10 Watt
Integrated LAN
Max number of PCIe lanes 4 4
Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Ports 2
Number of USB ports 5
PCI Express revision 2. 0 2.0
PCIe configurations 1×4/2×2/1×2 + 2×1/4×1 X4, X2, X1
Total number of SATA ports 2
UART
USB revision 2.0/3.0
Anti-Theft technology
Execute Disable Bit (EDB)
Intel® Identity Protection technology
Intel® OS Guard
Intel® Secure Key technology
Intel® Trusted Execution technology (TXT)
Secure Boot
4G WiMAX Wireless
Enhanced Intel SpeedStep® technology
General-Purpose Input/Output (GPIO)
HD Audio
Idle States
Intel 64
Intel® AES New Instructions
Intel® Hyper-Threading technology
Intel® Rapid Storage technology (RST)
Intel® Smart Response technology
Intel® Stable Image Platform Program (SIPP)
Intel® Turbo Boost technology
Intel® vPro™ Platform Eligibility
Smart Connect
Thermal Monitoring
Flexible Display interface (FDI)

Intel® Optane™ Memory Supported

Physical Address Extensions (PAE)

36-bit
Intel® Virtualization Technology (VT-x)
Intel® Virtualization Technology for Directed I/O (VT-d)
Intel® Virtualization Technology for Itanium (VT-i)
Intel® VT-x with Extended Page Tables (EPT)

Comparison of Intel Celeron N3150 and Intel Celeron J1900

Comparative analysis of the Intel Celeron N3150 and Intel Celeron J1900 processors by all known characteristics in the categories: General Information, Performance, Memory, Graphics, Graphical Interfaces, Graphics API Support, Compatibility, Peripherals, Security and Reliability, Technology, Virtualization.
Analysis of processor performance by benchmarks: PassMark — Single thread mark, PassMark — CPU mark, Geekbench 4 — Single Core, Geekbench 4 — Multi-Core, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Ocean Surface Simulation ( Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Frames ), GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Fps).
nine0003

Intel Celeron N3150

versus

Intel Celeron J1900

Benefits

Reasons to choose Intel Celeron N3150

  • Newer processor, release dates difference 1 year(s) 5 month(s)
  • powerful but with lower power consumption: 14 nm vs 22 nm

  • Approximately 67% less power consumption: 6 Watt vs 10 Watt
  • About 5% more performance in PassMark — CPU mark benchmark: 1204 vs 1143
  • About 54% more performance in CompuBench 1. 5 Desktop — Face Detection (mPixels/s) benchmark: 4.724 vs 3.068
  • CompuBench.5 benchmark Desktop — T-Rex (Frames/s) 10 times more: 0.484 vs 0.139
  • CompuBench 1.5 performance Desktop — Video Composition (Frames/s) 10 times more: 5.104 vs 0.508
  • About 46% more performance in GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Frames) benchmark: 1471 vs 1007
  • About 46% more performance in GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Fps) benchmark: 1471 vs 1007

nine0045

nine0041 1471 vs 1007

9

9 Release date 1 April 2015 vs 1 November 2013
Process 14 nm vs 22 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 6 Watt vs 10 Watt
PassMark — CPU mark 1204 vs 1143
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Face Detection (mPixels/s) 4. 724 vs 3.068
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — T-Rex (Frames/s) 0.484 vs 0.139
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Video Composition (Frames/s) 5.104 vs 0.508
GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Frames) 1471 vs 1007
GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Fps)

Reasons to choose Intel Celeron J1900

  • About 16% more clock speed: 2.42 GHz vs 2.08 GHz
  • About 17% more maximum core temperature: 105°C vs 90°C Single thread mark about 13% more: 651 vs 574
  • Geekbench 4 performance — Single Core about 9% more: 210 vs 192
  • About 5% more performance in Geekbench 4 — Multi-Core benchmark: 686 vs 655
  • About 38% more performance in CompuBench 1. 5 Desktop — Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 11.336 vs 8.191
  • Benchmark performance CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) about 27% more: 1.753 vs 1.375
Max frequency 2.42 GHz vs 2.08 GHz
Maximum core temperature 105°C vs 90°C
PassMark — Single thread mark 651 vs 574
Geekbench 4 — Single Core 210 vs 192
Geekbench 4 — Multi-Core 686 vs 655
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) 11.336 vs 8.191
CompuBench 1. 5 Desktop — Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) 1.753 vs 1.375

Benchmark comparison

nine0163 CPU 1: Intel Celeron N3150
CPU 2: Intel Celeron J1900

PassMark — Single thread mark
CPU 1
CPU 2
PassMark — CPU mark
CPU 1
CPU 2
Geekbench 4 — Single Core
CPU 1
CPU 2
Geekbench 4 — Multi-Core
CPU 1
CPU 2

nine0042

CompuBench 1. 5 Desktop — Face Detection (mPixels/s)
CPU 1
CPU 2
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)
CPU 1
CPU 2
11.336
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — T-Rex (Frames/s) nine0038

CPU 1
CPU 2
CompuBench 1. 5 Desktop — Video Composition (Frames/s)
CPU 1
CPU 2

nine0041

CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)
CPU 1
CPU 2

nine0045

GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Frames)
CPU 1
CPU 2
GFXBench 4. 0 — T-Rex (Fps)
CPU 1
CPU 2

nine0041 574

nine0041 655

nine0045

nine0041 1.375

nine0041 1471

nine0041 1471

Name Intel Celeron N3150 Intel Celeron J1900
PassMark — Single thread mark 651
PassMark — CPU mark 1204 1143
Geekbench 4 — Single Core 192 210
Geekbench 4 — Multi-Core 686
CompuBench 1. 5 Desktop — Face Detection (mPixels/s) 4.724 3.068
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) 8.191 11.336
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — T-Rex (Frames/s) 0.484 0.139
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Video Composition (Frames/s) 5.104 0.508
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) 1.753
GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) 501
GFXBench 4. 0 — Manhattan (Frames) 875
GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Frames) 1007
GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) 501
GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Fps) 875
GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Fps) 1007

Performance comparison

nine0045

nine0045

nine0041 Launched

nine0041 2.00 GHz

nine0041 105°C

nine0041 4

nine0041 8GB

nine0041 688 MHz

nine0041 8GB

nine0491

nine0491

nine0041 1

nine0041 FCBGA1170

nine0041 4

nine0491

nine0491

nine0491

nine0041

nine0491

nine0041

Intel Celeron N3150 Intel Celeron J1900
Architecture name Braswell Bay Trail
Issue date April 1, 2015 November 1, 2013
Price at first issue date $107 $82
Place in the ranking 2197 2569
Processor Number N3150 J1900
Series Intel® Celeron® Processor N Series Intel® Celeron® Processor J Series
Status Discontinued
Applicability Mobile Desktop
Support 64 bit
Base frequency 1. 60 GHz
Level 2 cache 2MB 2MB
Process 14nm 22 nm
Maximum core temperature 90°C
Maximum frequency 2.08 GHz 2.42 GHz
Number of cores 4 4
Number of threads 4
Level 1 cache 224KB
Maximum number of memory channels 2 2
Maximum memory size 8GB
Supported memory types DDR3L-1600 DDR3L 1333
Number of execution units 12
Graphics base frequency 320MHz
Maximum GPU clock 640MHz 854MHz
Intel® Clear Video HD Technology
Intel® Clear Video Technology
Intel® InTru™ 3D Technology
Intel® Quick Sync Video
Video memory size
Integrated graphics Intel HD Graphics Intel HD Graphics
Graphics max dynamic frequency 854MHz
Intel® Flexible Display Interface (Intel® FDI)
DisplayPort
eDP
HDMI
Maximum number of monitors supported 3 2
WiDi support
DirectX Yes
OpenGL Yes
Low Halogen Options Available
Maximum number of processors in configuration 1
Package Size 25mm x 27mm 25mm X 27mm
Scenario Design Power (SDP) 4W
Supported sockets FCBGA1170
Power consumption (TDP) 6 Watt 10 Watt
Integrated LAN
Number of PCI Express lanes 4
Maximum number of SATA 6 Gb/s ports 2
Number of USB ports 5
PCI Express revision 2. 0 2.0
PCIe configurations 1×4/2×2/1×2 + 2×1/4×1 X4, X2, X1
Total number of SATA ports 2
UART
USB revision 2.0/3.0
Anti-Theft Technology
Execute Disable Bit (EDB)
Intel® Identity Protection Technology
Intel® OS Guard
Intel® Secure Key Technology
Intel® Trusted Execution Technology (TXT)
Secure Boot
4G WiMAX Wireless nine0045

Enhanced Intel SpeedStep® Technology
General Purpose Input/Output (GPIO)
HD Audio nine0045

Idle States
Intel 64
Intel® AES New Instructions
Intel® Hyper-Threading Technology
Intel® Rapid Storage Technology (RST)
Intel® Smart Response Technology
Intel® Stable Image Platform Program (SIPP)
Intel® Turbo Boost Technology
Intel® vPro™ Platform Eligibility
Smart Connect
Thermal Monitoring
Flexible Display interface (FDI)
Intel® Optane™ Memory Supported
Physical Address Extensions (PAE) 36-bit
Intel® Virtualization Technology (VT-x)
Intel® Virtualization Technology for Directed I/O (VT-d)
Intel® Virtualization Technology for Itanium (VT-i) nine0045

Intel® VT-x with Extended Page Tables (EPT)

Intel Celeron N3150 vs.

Intel Celeron J1900

Intel Celeron N3150

Intel Celeron N3150 runs with 4 and 4 CPU threads It runs at 2.08 GHz base 2.08 GHz all cores while TDP is set to 6 W .CPU connects to BGA 1170 CPU socket This version includes 2.00 MB of L3 cache on a single die, supports 2 to support DDR3L-1600 SO-DIMM RAM, and supports 2.0 PCIe Gen 4 . Tjunction is kept below — degrees C. In particular, Braswell Architecture is advanced beyond 14 nm and supports VT-x, VT-x EPT . The product was launched Q2/2015

Intel Celeron J1900

Intel Celeron J1900 runs with 4 and 4 CPU threads It runs at 2.42 GHz base 2.42 GHz all cores while TDP is set to 10 W .The processor connects to BGA 1170 CPU socket This version includes 2.00 MB L3 cache on a single die, supports 2 to support RAM, and supports 2.0 PCIe Gen 4. Tjunction is kept below — degrees C. In particular, the Bay Trail Architecture is advanced beyond 22 nm and supports VT-x, VT-x EPT . The product was launched Q4/2013

Intel Celeron N3150

Intel Celeron J1900

Frequency 2. 00 GHz 4 Kernels 4 2.08GHz Turbo (1 core) 2.42 GHz 2.08GHz Turbo (all cores) 2.42 GHz No. Hyper Threading No. No. Acceleration No. normal Basic architecture normal

Intel HD Graphics 400

GPU

Intel HD Graphics (Baytrail GT1)

0.64GHz GPU (Turbo) 0.85 GHz 14nm Technology 22 nm

nine0045

0.64GHz GPU (Turbo) 0.85 GHz 12 DirectX Version 11.2 3 Max. displays 2 DDR3L-1600 SO-DIMM memory capacity 2 Memory channels 2 Maximum memory size No.

nine0041 ECC No. — L2 Cache — 2.00MB L3 Cache 2.00 MB 2.0 PCIe version 2.0 4 PCIe lanes 4 14nm Technology 22 nm BGA 1170 Connector BGA 1170 6W TDP 10W VT-x, VT-x EPT Virtualization VT-x, VT-x EPT Q2/2015 Release date Q4/2013

Show more details

Show more details

Cinebench R20 (Single-Core)

Cinebench R20 is the successor to Cinebench R15 and is also based on the Cinema 4 Suite. Cinema 4 is software used all over the world to create 3D forms. The single-core test uses only one CPU core, the number of cores or hyper-threading capability is not taken into account. nine0003

Cinebench R20 (Multi-Core)

Cinebench R20 is the successor to Cinebench R15 and is also based on the Cinema 4 Suite. Cinema 4 is software used all over the world to create 3D forms. The multi-core test uses all the CPU cores and has a big advantage of hyper-threading.

Cinebench R15 (Single-Core)

Cinebench R15 is the successor to Cinebench 11.5 and is also based on the Cinema 4 Suite. Cinema 4 is software used all over the world to create 3D forms. The single-core test uses only one CPU core, the number of cores or hyper-threading capability is not taken into account. nine0003

Cinebench R15 (Multi-Core)

Cinebench R15 is the successor to Cinebench 11.5 and is also based on Cinema 4 Suite. Cinema 4 is software used all over the world to create 3D forms. The multi-core test uses all the CPU cores and has a big advantage of hyper-threading.

Geekbench 5, 64bit (Single-Core)

Geekbench 5 is a memory-intensive, cross-platform benchmark. A fast memory will greatly push the result. The single-core test uses only one CPU core, the number of cores or hyper-threading capability is not taken into account. nine0003

Geekbench 5, 64bit (Multi-Core)

Geekbench 5 is a memory-intensive, cross-platform benchmark. A fast memory will greatly push the result. The multi-core test uses all the CPU cores and has a big advantage of hyper-threading.

iGPU — FP32 Performance (Single-precision GFLOPS)

Theoretical processing performance of the processor’s internal graphics unit with simple precision (32 bits) in GFLOPS. GFLOPS specifies how many billions of floating point operations the iGPU can perform per second. nine0003

Geekbench 3, 64bit (Single-Core)

Geekbench 3 is a cross-platform benchmark that is memory intensive. A fast memory will greatly push the result. The single-core test uses only one CPU core, the number of cores or hyper-threading capability is not taken into account.

Geekbench 3, 64bit (Multi-Core)

Geekbench 3 is a cross-platform benchmark that is memory intensive. A fast memory will greatly push the result. The multi-core test uses all the CPU cores and has a big advantage of hyper-threading. nine0003

Cinebench R11.5, 64bit (Single-Core)

Cinebench 11.5 is based on the Cinema 4D Suite, a software that is popular for creating shapes and other things in 3D. The single-core test uses only one CPU core, the number of cores or hyper-threading capability is not taken into account.

Cinebench R11.5, 64bit (Multi-Core)

Cinebench 11.5 is based on Cinema 4D Suite, a software that is popular for creating shapes and other 3D. The multi-core test uses all the CPU cores and has a big advantage of hyper-threading. nine0003

Cinebench R11.5, 64bit (iGPU, OpenGL)

Cinebench 11.5 is based on the Cinema 4D Suite, a software that is popular for creating shapes and other things in 3D. The iGPU test uses the CPU’s internal graphics unit to execute OpenGL commands.

Estimated results for PassMark CPU Mark

Some of the processors listed below have been tested with CPU-Comparison.