Celeron E1600 vs Celeron J1800
Celeron E1600
Celeron J1800
Performance Spectrum - CPU
About PassMark
PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (PassMark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The Celeron E1600 is positioned at rank 896 and the Celeron J1800 is on rank 750, so the Celeron J1800 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Celeron E1600
Performance Per Dollar Celeron J1800
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Celeron E1600 | Celeron J1800 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ✅ Superior gaming performance | ❌ Lower gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | ⚠️ Higher cost ($10) | ✅ More affordable ($0) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Allendale (2006−2009) / 65 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Bay Trail-D (2013) / 22 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Celeron E1600 | Celeron J1800 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️ Higher cost ($10) | ✅ More affordable ($0) |
Performance Check
To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.
Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Celeron E1600 and Celeron J1800
Celeron E1600
The Celeron E1600 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Allendale (2006−2009) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.4 GHz, with boost up to 2.4 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB (total). Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: LGA775. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR1, DDR2, DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 815 points. Launch price was $69.
Celeron J1800
The Celeron J1800 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 November 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Bay Trail-D (2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.41 GHz, with boost up to 2.58 GHz. L3 cache: 1 MB L2 Cache. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1170. Thermal design power (TDP): 10 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 820 points. Launch price was $72.
Processing Power
Both the Celeron E1600 and Celeron J1800 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.4 GHz on the Celeron E1600 versus 2.58 GHz on the Celeron J1800 — a 7.2% clock advantage for the Celeron J1800 (base: 2.4 GHz vs 2.41 GHz). The Celeron E1600 uses the Allendale (2006−2009) architecture (65 nm), while the Celeron J1800 uses Bay Trail-D (2013) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron E1600 scores 815 against the Celeron J1800's 820 — a 0.6% lead for the Celeron J1800. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 310 vs 150, a 69.6% lead for the Celeron E1600 that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 560 vs 250 (76.5% advantage for the Celeron E1600). L3 cache: 0 kB on the Celeron E1600 vs 1 MB L2 Cache on the Celeron J1800.
| Feature | Celeron E1600 | Celeron J1800 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 2 / 2 |
| Boost Clock | 2.4 GHz | 2.58 GHz+8% |
| Base Clock | 2.4 GHz | 2.41 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 1 MB L2 Cache |
| L2 Cache | 512 kB (total) | 1 MB+100% |
| Process | 65 nm | 22 nm-66% |
| Architecture | Allendale (2006−2009) | Bay Trail-D (2013) |
| PassMark | 815 | 820 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 310+107% | 150 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 560+124% | 250 |
Memory & Platform
The Celeron E1600 uses the LGA775 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Celeron J1800 uses FCBGA1170 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR2-800 on the Celeron E1600 versus DDR3L-1333 on the Celeron J1800 — the Celeron J1800 supports 40% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Both support up to 8 GB of RAM. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 0 (Celeron E1600) vs 4 (Celeron J1800) — the Celeron J1800 offers 4 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: G31,P35,G41 (Celeron E1600) and N/A (SoC) (Celeron J1800).
| Feature | Celeron E1600 | Celeron J1800 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA775 | FCBGA1170 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 1.1 | PCIe 2.0+82% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR2-800 | DDR3L-1333+50% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 8 GB | 8 GB |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | 4 |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: No (Celeron E1600) vs VT-x (Celeron J1800). The Celeron J1800 includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics (Bay Trail)), while the Celeron E1600 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron E1600 targets Budget, Celeron J1800 targets Low Power. Direct competitor: Celeron E1600 rivals Pentium E2220; Celeron J1800 rivals Pentium J2850.
| Feature | Celeron E1600 | Celeron J1800 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | Yes |
| IGPU Model | — | HD Graphics (Bay Trail) |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | No | VT-x |
| Target Use | Budget | Low Power |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Celeron E1600 and Celeron J1800
