EPYC 9355 vs Celeron G1620

VS

Primary details

Comparing Celeron G1620 and EPYC 9355 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking2470not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.03no data
Market segmentDesktop processorServer
Power efficiency1.69no data
Architecture codenameIvy Bridge (2012−2013)Turin (2024)
Release date3 December 2012 (11 years ago)10 October 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$208$3,694

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron G1620 and EPYC 9355 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 GHz3.55 GHz
Boost clock speed2.7 GHz4.4 GHz
Bus rate5 GT/sno data
L1 cache64 KB (per core)80 KB (per core)
L2 cache256 KB (per core)1 MB (per core)
L3 cache2 MB (shared)256 MB (shared)
Chip lithography22 nm4 nm
Die size94 mm28x 70.6 mm2
Maximum case temperature (TCase)65 °Cno data
Number of transistorsno data66,520 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data

Compatibility

Information on Celeron G1620 and EPYC 9355 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 configuration12
SocketFCLGA1155SP5
Power consumption (TDP)55 Watt280 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron G1620 and EPYC 9355. 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+-
Precision Boost 2no data+

Security technologies

Celeron G1620 and EPYC 9355 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 9355 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 9355. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR5
Maximum memory size32 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidth21 GB/sno data
ECC memory support+-

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

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

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron G1620 and EPYC 9355 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported3no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron G1620 and EPYC 9355.

PCIe version2.05.0
PCI Express lanesno data128

Pros & cons summary


Recency 3 December 2012 10 October 2024
Physical cores 2 32
Threads 2 64
Chip lithography 22 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 55 Watt 280 Watt

Celeron G1620 has 409.1% lower power consumption.

EPYC 9355, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 11 years, 1500% more physical cores and 3100% more threads, and a 450% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Celeron G1620 and EPYC 9355. We've got no test results to judge.

Note that Celeron G1620 is a desktop processor while EPYC 9355 is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron G1620 and EPYC 9355, 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 9355
EPYC 9355

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

No user ratings yet.

Rate EPYC 9355 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 9355, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.