EPYC 9575F vs Celeron 807UE
Primary details
Comparing Celeron 807UE and EPYC 9575F processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Server |
| Series | Intel Celeron | no data |
| Architecture codename | Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) | Turin (2024) |
| Release date | no data (2024 years ago) | 10 October 2024 (less than a year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $11,791 |
Detailed specifications
Celeron 807UE and EPYC 9575F 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 | 1 (Single-Core) | 64 (Tetrahexaconta-Core) |
| Threads | 1 | 128 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 3.3 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1 GHz | 5 GHz |
| Bus type | DMI 2.0 | no data |
| Bus rate | 4 × 5 GT/s | no data |
| Multiplier | 10 | no data |
| L1 cache | 64 KB | 80 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 256 KB | 1 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 1.5 MB | 256 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 4 nm |
| Die size | 131 mm2 | 8x 70.6 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 504 Million | 66,520 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron 807UE and EPYC 9575F 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 (Uniprocessor) | 2 |
| Socket | no data | SP5 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 10 Watt | 400 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 807UE and EPYC 9575F. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | - | + |
| FMA | + | - |
| AVX | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| Precision Boost 2 | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron 807UE and EPYC 9575F are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
| VT-x | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron 807UE and EPYC 9575F. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3-1333 | DDR5 |
| Maximum memory size | 4 GB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 1 | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 10.662 GB/s | no data |
| ECC memory support | + | - |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Intel HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) | N/A |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron 807UE and EPYC 9575F.
| PCIe version | no data | 5.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 128 |
Pros & cons summary
| Physical cores | 1 | 64 |
| Threads | 1 | 128 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 4 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 10 Watt | 400 Watt |
Celeron 807UE has 3900% lower power consumption.
EPYC 9575F, on the other hand, has 6300% more physical cores and 12700% more threads, and a 700% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Celeron 807UE and EPYC 9575F. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that Celeron 807UE is a notebook processor while EPYC 9575F is a server/workstation one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron 807UE and EPYC 9575F, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
