EPYC 7551P vs Celeron G1620

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron G1620
2012
2 cores / 2 threads, 55 Watt
1.02
EPYC 7551P
2017
32 cores / 64 threads, 180 Watt
24.91
+2342%

EPYC 7551P outperforms Celeron G1620 by a whopping 2342% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron G1620 and EPYC 7551P processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking2461204
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.034.33
Market segmentDesktop processorServer
Seriesno dataAMD EPYC
Power efficiency1.6912.62
Architecture codenameIvy Bridge (2012−2013)Naples (2017−2018)
Release date3 December 2012 (11 years ago)20 June 2017 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$208$2,100

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

EPYC 7551P has 14333% better value for money than Celeron G1620.

Detailed specifications

Celeron G1620 and EPYC 7551P 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)32 (Dotriaconta-Core)
Threads264
Base clock speed2.7 GHz2 GHz
Boost clock speed2.7 GHz2 GHz
Bus rate5 GT/sno data
Multiplierno data20
L1 cache64 KB (per core)3 MB
L2 cache256 KB (per core)16 MB
L3 cache2 MB (shared)64 MB (shared)
Chip lithography22 nm14 nm
Die size94 mm2213 mm2
Maximum case temperature (TCase)65 °Cno data
Number of transistorsno data19200 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplier-+

Compatibility

Information on Celeron G1620 and EPYC 7551P 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)
SocketFCLGA1155TR4
Power consumption (TDP)55 Watt180 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron G1620 and EPYC 7551P. 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+-

Security technologies

Celeron G1620 and EPYC 7551P technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

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

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron G1620 and EPYC 7551P 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 G1620 and EPYC 7551P. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR4 Eight-channel
Maximum memory size32 GB2 TiB
Max memory channels28
Maximum memory bandwidth21 GB/s170.671 GB/s
ECC memory support++

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel® HD Graphics for 3rd Generation Intel® Processorsno data
Graphics max frequency1.05 GHzno data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron G1620 and EPYC 7551P integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported3no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron G1620 and EPYC 7551P.

PCIe version2.03.0
PCI Express lanesno data128

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 G1620 1.02
EPYC 7551P 24.91
+2342%

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 G1620 1560
EPYC 7551P 38126
+2344%

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 G1620 415
EPYC 7551P 931
+124%

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 G1620 725
EPYC 7551P 6192
+754%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.02 24.91
Recency 3 December 2012 20 June 2017
Physical cores 2 32
Threads 2 64
Chip lithography 22 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 55 Watt 180 Watt

Celeron G1620 has 227.3% lower power consumption.

EPYC 7551P, on the other hand, has a 2342.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, 1500% more physical cores and 3100% more threads, and a 57.1% more advanced lithography process.

The EPYC 7551P is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron G1620 in performance tests.

Note that Celeron G1620 is a desktop processor while EPYC 7551P is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron G1620 and EPYC 7551P, 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 G1620
Celeron G1620
AMD EPYC 7551P
EPYC 7551P

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.


3.4 84 votes

Rate Celeron G1620 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 78 votes

Rate EPYC 7551P on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron G1620 or EPYC 7551P, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.