The Celeron J1750 and Atom D2700 finish within 15 seconds of each other in our 7-Zip workload. Given the application's optimizations for threading, it's possible that Hyper-Threading is keeping the Atom well-utilized, while the Celeron's two cores are bottlenecked by something else. Either way, the task takes almost 10 minutes on both platforms.
We've shown WinRAR to be far less friendly to heavily parallel architectures in the past. Sure enough, Celeron J1750 shows up between AMD's A4 and the Atom D2700.
We run three different WinZip workloads. Like WinRAR, we don't get the best threading from 17.0 (this was improved in later versions). However, we can still see the CPU-oriented run, in red, favors the Celeron J1750 over Atom D2700. The EZ iteration, which goes for best compression (and consequently the longest run times), extends that lead over Cedarview.
Here's the thing, though. Intel rates the Celeron J1750 for up to 2.4 GHz using Boost technology. That means it enjoys the highest clock rates when it's operating under a thermal limit. But if we run our WinZip test as part of a scripted sequence, we get the numbers displayed above. If we run the workload on its own, without heating the SoC up first, we get significantly higher scores.
We wouldn't have figured this out had it not been for the curiously-lower results in our OpenCL-based benchmark. Re-running the test with Celeron J1750 completely cool, it's possible to shave a bunch of time from the outcome. The implication is that taxing the SoC depletes headroom for higher Burst frequencies. However, that's still preferable to a more dramatic throttle state in response to a thermal trigger.
- If The Gloves Weren't Off Before, They Are Now...
- The Atom Z3000 SoC Architecture
- Bay Trail's Performance On The Desktop: Benchmarking Celeron J1750
- Results: Power And Efficiency
- Results: Synthetics And 3D
- Results: Productivity
- Results: Compression
- Results: Media Encoding
- Celeron J1750: Bay Trail Is Faster And Much More Efficient