Ryzen 3 3200G vs Celeron M 390
Aggregate performance score
Ryzen 3 3200G outperforms Celeron M 390 by a whopping 2367% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Celeron M 390 and Ryzen 3 3200G processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 3275 | 1340 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 53 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 8.90 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | Celeron M | AMD Ryzen 3 |
| Power efficiency | 0.82 | 6.51 |
| Architecture codename | Dothan (2004−2005) | Picasso (2019−2022) |
| Release date | no data | 7 July 2019 (5 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $99 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Celeron M 390 and Ryzen 3 3200G 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) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 1 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 1.7 GHz | 3.6 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.7 GHz | 4 GHz |
| Bus type | no data | PCIe 3.0 |
| Bus rate | 400 MHz | no data |
| Multiplier | no data | 36 |
| L1 cache | no data | 96 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | no data | 512 KB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 1 MB L2 KB | 4 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 90 nm | 12 nm |
| Die size | no data | 210 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | no data | 4,940 million |
| 64 bit support | - | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
| Unlocked multiplier | - | + |
| VID voltage range | 1.004V-1.292V | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron M 390 and Ryzen 3 3200G 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 | no data | 1 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | PPGA478, H-PBGA479 | AM4 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 21 Watt | 65 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M 390 and Ryzen 3 3200G. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| 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 |
| PAE | 32 Bit | no data |
| FSB parity | - | no data |
Security technologies
Celeron M 390 and Ryzen 3 3200G 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 390 and Ryzen 3 3200G are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
| VT-x | - | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron M 390 and Ryzen 3 3200G. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR4 Dual-channel |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 64 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 46.933 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | AMD Radeon Vega 8 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron M 390 and Ryzen 3 3200G.
| PCIe version | no data | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 20 |
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.18 | 4.44 |
| Physical cores | 1 | 4 |
| Threads | 1 | 4 |
| Chip lithography | 90 nm | 12 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 21 Watt | 65 Watt |
Celeron M 390 has 209.5% lower power consumption.
Ryzen 3 3200G, on the other hand, has a 2366.7% higher aggregate performance score, 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads, and a 650% more advanced lithography process.
The Ryzen 3 3200G is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron M 390 in performance tests.
Be aware that Celeron M 390 is a notebook processor while Ryzen 3 3200G is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M 390 and Ryzen 3 3200G, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
