Ryzen 5 2600 vs Celeron M 530

VS

Primary details

Comparing Celeron M 530 and Ryzen 5 2600 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the rankingnot rated901
Place by popularitynot in top-10022
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data10.00
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesCeleron MAMD Ryzen 5
Power efficiencyno data12.09
Architecture codenameMerom (2006−2008)Pinnacle Riege (Zen+) (2018)
Release dateno data (2024 years ago)13 April 2018 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$199

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron M 530 and Ryzen 5 2600 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)6 (Hexa-Core)
Threads112
Base clock speed1.73 GHz3.4 GHz
Boost clock speed1.73 GHz3.9 GHz
Bus rate533 MHz4 × 8 GT/s
Multiplierno data34
L1 cacheno data576 KB
L2 cacheno data3 MB
L3 cache1 MB L2 Cache16 MB (shared)
Chip lithography65 nm12 nm
Die sizeno data213 mm2
Maximum core temperature100 °C95 °C
Number of transistorsno data4800 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplier-+
VID voltage range0.95V-1.3Vno data

Compatibility

Information on Celeron M 530 and Ryzen 5 2600 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)
SocketPBGA479,PPGA478AM4
Power consumption (TDP)30 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M 530 and Ryzen 5 2600. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataMMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, BMI2, ABM, FMA, ADX, SMEP, SMAP, SMT, CPB, AES-NI, RDRAND, RDSEED, SHA, SME
AES-NI-+
FMA-+
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
FSB parity-no data
Precision Boost 2no data+

Security technologies

Celeron M 530 and Ryzen 5 2600 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 530 and Ryzen 5 2600 are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
VT-x-no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron M 530 and Ryzen 5 2600. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR4
Maximum memory sizeno data128 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 530 and Ryzen 5 2600.

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 530 302
Ryzen 5 2600 13189
+4267%

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

Celeron M 530 1615
Ryzen 5 2600 4726
+193%

3DMark06 CPU

3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.

Celeron M 530 739
Ryzen 5 2600 9290
+1157%

Pros & cons summary


Physical cores 1 6
Threads 1 12
Chip lithography 65 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 30 Watt 65 Watt

Celeron M 530 has 116.7% lower power consumption.

Ryzen 5 2600, on the other hand, has 500% more physical cores and 1100% more threads, and a 441.7% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Celeron M 530 and Ryzen 5 2600. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Celeron M 530 is a notebook processor while Ryzen 5 2600 is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M 530 and Ryzen 5 2600, 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 530
Celeron M 530
AMD Ryzen 5 2600
Ryzen 5 2600

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 40 votes

Rate Celeron M 530 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 14863 votes

Rate Ryzen 5 2600 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron M 530 or Ryzen 5 2600, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.