Celeron J1800 vs E1-2200

Celeron J1800 vs E1-2200 Performance Spectrum

Celeron J1800

2 / 2

820

+2.2%

802

0.0%

Athlon XP 3200+

Athlon 64 3300+

Mobile Athlon 64 3700+

Athlon 64 FX-55

Ryzen 7 4700G

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

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.

Celeron J1800 vs E1-2200 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Celeron J1800 vs E1-2200: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

Celeron J1800

2013

Why buy it

✅Draws 1W instead of 9W, a 8W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (4 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics (Bay Trail), while E1-2200 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.

E1-2200

2013

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (802 vs 820).
❌800% higher power demand at 9W vs 1W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron J1800 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron J1800 better than E1-2200?

Yes. Celeron J1800 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 1.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 2.2% better PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Celeron J1800 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 1.6% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Celeron J1800 is the stronger fit. You are getting 2.2% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Celeron J1800 still makes the most sense overall. Celeron J1800 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 1.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Celeron J1800 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 2 threads instead of 2/2. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Celeron J1800 vs E1-2200 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

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.

E1-2200

The E1-2200 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Kabini (2013−2014) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.05 GHz. L2 cache: 1024 kB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: FT3. Thermal design power (TDP): 9 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 802 points. Launch price was $50.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Celeron J1800 and E1-2200 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.58 GHz on the Celeron J1800 versus 1.05 GHz on the E1-2200 — a 84.3% clock advantage for the Celeron J1800. The Celeron J1800 uses the Bay Trail-D (2013) architecture (22 nm), while the E1-2200 uses Kabini (2013−2014) (28 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron J1800 scores 820 against the E1-2200's 802 — a 2.2% lead for the Celeron J1800.

Feature	Celeron J1800	E1-2200
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	2.58 GHz+146%	1.05 GHz
Base Clock	2.41 GHz	—
L3 Cache	1 MB L2 Cache	—
L2 Cache	1 MB	1024 kB
Process	22 nm-21%	28 nm
Architecture	Bay Trail-D (2013)	Kabini (2013−2014)
PassMark	820+2%	802
Geekbench 6 Single	150	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	250	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron J1800 uses the FCBGA1170 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the E1-2200 uses FT3 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Celeron J1800	E1-2200
Socket	FCBGA1170	FT3
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3L-1333	—
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	4	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x (Celeron J1800) / not specified (E1-2200). The Celeron J1800 includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics (Bay Trail)), while the E1-2200 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron J1800 targets Low Power. Direct competitor: Celeron J1800 rivals Pentium J2850.