EPYC 9375F vs Celeron 4305UE
Aggregate performance score
EPYC 9375F outperforms Celeron 4305UE by a whopping 5328% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Celeron 4305UE and EPYC 9375F processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2468 | 21 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 7.49 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Server |
| Power efficiency | 6.73 | 17.11 |
| Architecture codename | Whiskey Lake-U (2018−2019) | Turin (2024) |
| Release date | 1 October 2018 (6 years ago) | 10 October 2024 (less than a year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $107 | $5,306 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Celeron 4305UE and EPYC 9375F 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 cores | 2 (Dual-core) | 32 (Dotriaconta-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 64 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 3.85 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2 GHz | 4.8 GHz |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 80 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 256 KB (per core) | 1 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 2 MB (shared) | 256 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 10 nm | 4 nm |
| Die size | no data | 8x 70.6 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | no data | 66,520 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | + | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron 4305UE and EPYC 9375F 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 configuration | 1 | 2 |
| Socket | Intel BGA 1528 | SP5 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 320 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 4305UE and EPYC 9375F. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| Precision Boost 2 | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron 4305UE and EPYC 9375F are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
| VT-d | + | no data |
| VT-x | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron 4305UE and EPYC 9375F. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 | DDR5 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Intel UHD Graphics 610 | N/A |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron 4305UE and EPYC 9375F.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | 5.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 16 | 128 |
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.06 | 57.54 |
| Recency | 1 October 2018 | 10 October 2024 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 32 |
| Threads | 2 | 64 |
| Chip lithography | 10 nm | 4 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 320 Watt |
Celeron 4305UE has 2033.3% lower power consumption.
EPYC 9375F, on the other hand, has a 5328.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, 1500% more physical cores and 3100% more threads, and a 150% more advanced lithography process.
The EPYC 9375F is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron 4305UE in performance tests.
Be aware that Celeron 4305UE is a notebook processor while EPYC 9375F is a server/workstation one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
