EPYC 7302P vs Celeron M 450

Aggregate performance score

Celeron M 450
1 core / 1 thread, 27 Watt
0.14
EPYC 7302P
2019
16 cores / 32 threads, 155 Watt
20.57
+14593%

EPYC 7302P outperforms Celeron M 450 by a whopping 14593% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron M 450 and EPYC 7302P processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking3314267
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data13.55
Market segmentLaptopServer
SeriesCeleron MAMD EPYC
Power efficiency0.4912.56
Architecture codenameYonah (2005−2006)Zen 2 (2017−2020)
Release dateno data (2024 years ago)7 August 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$825

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron M 450 and EPYC 7302P 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)16 (Hexadeca-Core)
Threads132
Base clock speed2 GHz3 GHz
Boost clock speed2 GHz3.3 GHz
Bus rate533 MHzno data
Multiplierno data30
L1 cacheno data96K (per core)
L2 cacheno data512K (per core)
L3 cache1 MB L2 KB128 MB (shared)
Chip lithography65 nm7 nm, 14 nm
Die sizeno data192 mm2
Maximum core temperature100 °Cno data
Number of transistorsno data4,800 million
64 bit support-+
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplier-+
VID voltage range1.0V-1.3Vno data

Compatibility

Information on Celeron M 450 and EPYC 7302P 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)
SocketPPGA478TR4
Power consumption (TDP)27 Watt155 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M 450 and EPYC 7302P. 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
PAE32 Bitno data
FSB parity-no data
Precision Boost 2no data+

Security technologies

Celeron M 450 and EPYC 7302P 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 450 and EPYC 7302P are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
VT-x-no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron M 450 and EPYC 7302P. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR4 Eight-channel
Maximum memory sizeno data4 TiB
Maximum memory bandwidthno data204.763 GB/s

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 M 450 0.14
EPYC 7302P 20.57
+14593%

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 450 230
EPYC 7302P 32669
+14104%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.14 20.57
Physical cores 1 16
Threads 1 32
Chip lithography 65 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 27 Watt 155 Watt

Celeron M 450 has 474.1% lower power consumption.

EPYC 7302P, on the other hand, has a 14592.9% higher aggregate performance score, 1500% more physical cores and 3100% more threads, and a 828.6% more advanced lithography process.

The EPYC 7302P is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron M 450 in performance tests.

Be aware that Celeron M 450 is a notebook processor while EPYC 7302P is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M 450 and EPYC 7302P, 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 450
Celeron M 450
AMD EPYC 7302P
EPYC 7302P

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 13 votes

Rate Celeron M 450 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 27 votes

Rate EPYC 7302P on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron M 450 or EPYC 7302P, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.