Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 vs Celeron Dual-Core T1600

VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron Dual-Core T1600
2008
2 cores / 2 threads, 35 Watt
0.61
Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360
2024
8 cores / 16 AMD Zen 5 AMD Zen 5c threads, 28 Watt
15.82
+2493%

Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 outperforms Celeron Dual-Core T1600 by a whopping 2493% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron Dual-Core T1600 and Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking2791442
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel Celeron Dual-CoreAMD Strix Point (Zen 5/5c, Ryzen AI 3/5/7/9)
Power efficiency1.6252.48
Architecture codenameMerom (2006−2008)Strix Point (Zen 5) (2024)
Release date1 May 2008 (16 years ago)1 October 2024 (less than a year ago)

Detailed specifications

Celeron Dual-Core T1600 and Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 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 AMD Zen 5 AMD Zen 5c
Boost clock speed1.66 GHz5.1 GHz
Bus rate667 MHz54 MHz
L2 cache1 MBno data
Chip lithography65 nm4 nm
Die size143 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature100 °Cno data
Number of transistors291 Millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data

Compatibility

Information on Celeron Dual-Core T1600 and Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 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.

SocketPPGA478FP8
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt28 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron Dual-Core T1600 and Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataUSB 4, XDNA 2 NPU (50 TOPS), Secure Processor, SMT, AES, AVX, AVX2, AVX512, FMA3, MMX (+), SHA, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, SSE4A
AES-NI-+
AVX-+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron Dual-Core T1600 and Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR5

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataAMD Radeon 880M

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 Dual-Core T1600 0.61
Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 15.82
+2493%

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 Dual-Core T1600 950
Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 24659
+2496%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.61 15.82
Recency 1 May 2008 1 October 2024
Physical cores 2 8
Threads 2 16 AMD Zen 5 AMD Zen 5c
Chip lithography 65 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 28 Watt

Celeron Dual-Core T1600 has -87.5% more threads.

Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360, on the other hand, has a 2493.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 16 years, 300% more physical cores, a 1525% more advanced lithography process, and 25% lower power consumption.

The Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron Dual-Core T1600 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron Dual-Core T1600 and Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360, 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 Dual-Core T1600
Celeron Dual-Core T1600
AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360
Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360

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.


3.5 13 votes

Rate Celeron Dual-Core T1600 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron Dual-Core T1600 or Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.