Ryzen 7 3700X vs Celeron 1017U

Aggregate performance score

Celeron 1017U
2013
2 cores / 2 threads, 17 Watt
0.95
Ryzen 7 3700X
2019
8 cores / 16 threads, 65 Watt
14.19
+1394%

Ryzen 7 3700X outperforms Celeron 1017U by a whopping 1394% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron 1017U and Ryzen 7 3700X processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking2500508
Place by popularitynot in top-10073
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data18.54
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesIntel CeleronAMD Ryzen 7
Power efficiency5.2920.66
Architecture codenameIvy Bridge (2012−2013)Matisse (Zen 2) (2019−2020)
Release date1 July 2013 (11 years ago)7 July 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$329

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron 1017U and Ryzen 7 3700X 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 cores2 (Dual-core)8 (Octa-Core)
Threads216
Base clock speed1.6 GHz3.6 GHz
Boost clock speed1.6 GHz4.4 GHz
Bus rate5 GT/sno data
L1 cache128 KB96K (per core)
L2 cache512 KB512K (per core)
L3 cache2 MB32 MB
Chip lithography22 nm7 nm, 12 nm
Die size94 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature105 °Cno data
Number of transistorsno data19,200 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplier-+

Compatibility

Information on Celeron 1017U and Ryzen 7 3700X 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 (Uniprocessor)
SocketFCBGA1023AM4
Power consumption (TDP)17 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 1017U and Ryzen 7 3700X. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2no data
AES-NI-+
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
My WiFi-no data
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Flex Memory Access+no data
Demand Based Switching-no data
FDI+no data
Fast Memory Access+no data
Precision Boost 2no data+

Security technologies

Celeron 1017U and Ryzen 7 3700X technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-no data
EDB+no data
Anti-Theft-no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron 1017U and Ryzen 7 3700X are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
VT-d-no data
VT-x+no data
EPT+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron 1017U and Ryzen 7 3700X. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR4 Dual-channel
Maximum memory size32 GB128 GB
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidth25.6 GB/s51.196 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel HD Graphics for 3rd Generation Intel Processors-
Clear Video--
Clear Video HD--
Graphics max frequency1 GHz-
InTru 3D--

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron 1017U and Ryzen 7 3700X integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported3-
eDP+-
DisplayPort+-
HDMI+-
SDVO+-
CRT+-

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron 1017U and Ryzen 7 3700X.

PCIe version2.0no data
PCI Express lanes16no data

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.

Celeron 1017U 0.95
Ryzen 7 3700X 14.19
+1394%

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.

Celeron 1017U 1508
Ryzen 7 3700X 22536
+1394%

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

Celeron 1017U 263
Ryzen 7 3700X 1671
+535%

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

Celeron 1017U 454
Ryzen 7 3700X 8083
+1680%

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

Celeron 1017U 2201
Ryzen 7 3700X 5839
+165%

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

Celeron 1017U 4155
Ryzen 7 3700X 40439
+873%

3DMark06 CPU

3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.

Celeron 1017U 1719
Ryzen 7 3700X 13815
+704%

wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

Celeron 1017U 46.38
Ryzen 7 3700X 3.71
+1150%

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.

Celeron 1017U 1
Ryzen 7 3700X 23
+1684%

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R11.5 is an old benchmark by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version loads a single thread with ray tracing to render a glossy room full of crystal spheres and light sources.

Celeron 1017U 0.61
Ryzen 7 3700X 2.3
+277%

TrueCrypt AES

TrueCrypt is a discontinued piece of software that was widely used for on-the-fly-encryption of disk partitions, now superseded by VeraCrypt. It contains several embedded performance tests, one of them being TrueCrypt AES, which measures data encryption speed using AES algorithm. Result is encryption speed in gigabytes per second.

Celeron 1017U 0.1
Ryzen 7 3700X 11.4
+8043%

x264 encoding pass 2

x264 Pass 2 is a slower variant of x264 video compression that produces a variable bit rate output file, which results in better quality since the higher bit rate is used when it is needed more. Benchmark result is still measured in frames per second.  

Celeron 1017U 8
Ryzen 7 3700X 115
+1419%

x264 encoding pass 1

x264 version 4.0 is a video encoding benchmark uses MPEG 4 x264 compression method to compress a sample HD (720p) video. Pass 1 is a faster variant that produces a constant bit rate output file. Its result is measured in frames per second, which means how many frames of the source video file were encoded per second.  

Celeron 1017U 42
Ryzen 7 3700X 270
+543%

WinRAR 4.0

WinRAR 4.0 is an outdated version of a popular file archiver. It contains an internal speed test, using 'Best' setting of RAR compression on large chunks of randomly generated data. Its results are measured in kilobytes per second.

Celeron 1017U 1150
Ryzen 7 3700X 7503
+552%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.95 14.19
Recency 1 July 2013 7 July 2019
Physical cores 2 8
Threads 2 16
Chip lithography 22 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 17 Watt 65 Watt

Celeron 1017U has 282.4% lower power consumption.

Ryzen 7 3700X, on the other hand, has a 1393.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, 300% more physical cores and 700% more threads, and a 214.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Ryzen 7 3700X is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron 1017U in performance tests.

Be aware that Celeron 1017U is a notebook processor while Ryzen 7 3700X is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron 1017U and Ryzen 7 3700X, 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.


Intel Celeron 1017U
Celeron 1017U
AMD Ryzen 7 3700X
Ryzen 7 3700X

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.


2.8 71 vote

Rate Celeron 1017U on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.4 5343 votes

Rate Ryzen 7 3700X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron 1017U or Ryzen 7 3700X, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.