Ryzen 7 2700X vs Celeron M 360

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

Comparing Celeron M 360 and Ryzen 7 2700X processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the rankingnot rated695
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data9.68
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesCeleron MAMD Ryzen 7
Power efficiencyno data9.94
Architecture codenameDothan (2004−2005)Zen+ (2018−2019)
Release dateno data (2024 years ago)13 April 2018 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$329

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron M 360 and Ryzen 7 2700X 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 cores1 (Single-Core)8 (Octa-Core)
Threads116
Base clock speed1.4 GHz3.7 GHz
Boost clock speed1.4 GHz4.3 GHz
Bus rate400 MHz4 × 8 GT/s
Multiplierno data37
L1 cacheno data768 KB
L2 cacheno data4 MB
L3 cache1 MB L2 KB16 MB (shared)
Chip lithography90 nm12 nm
Die sizeno data213 mm2
Maximum core temperature100 °Cno data
Number of transistorsno data4800 Million
64 bit support-+
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplier-+
VID voltage range1.26V, 1.004V-1.292Vno data

Compatibility

Information on Celeron M 360 and Ryzen 7 2700X 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 configurationno data1 (Uniprocessor)
SocketPPGA478, H-PBGA479AM4
Power consumption (TDP)21 Watt105 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M 360 and Ryzen 7 2700X. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataSSE4.2, SSE4A, AMD-V, AES, AVX2, FMA3, SHA
AES-NI-+
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)-no data
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
Idle States-no data
Demand Based Switching-no data
PAE32 Bitno data
FSB parity-no data
Precision Boost 2no data+

Security technologies

Celeron M 360 and Ryzen 7 2700X technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-no data
EDB+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron M 360 and Ryzen 7 2700X are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
VT-x-no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron M 360 and Ryzen 7 2700X. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR4 Dual-channel
Maximum memory sizeno data64 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
Maximum memory bandwidthno data46.933 GB/s
ECC memory support-+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron M 360 and Ryzen 7 2700X.

PCIe versionno data3.0
PCI Express lanesno data20

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.



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 M 360 221
Ryzen 7 2700X 17518
+7827%

wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

Celeron M 360 131
Ryzen 7 2700X 3.48
+3664%

Pros & cons summary


Physical cores 1 8
Threads 1 16
Chip lithography 90 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 21 Watt 105 Watt

Celeron M 360 has 400% lower power consumption.

Ryzen 7 2700X, on the other hand, has 700% more physical cores and 1500% more threads, and a 650% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Celeron M 360 and Ryzen 7 2700X. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Celeron M 360 is a notebook processor while Ryzen 7 2700X is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M 360 and Ryzen 7 2700X, 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 M 360
Celeron M 360
AMD Ryzen 7 2700X
Ryzen 7 2700X

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.


2.8 12 votes

Rate Celeron M 360 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.4 2880 votes

Rate Ryzen 7 2700X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron M 360 or Ryzen 7 2700X, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.