EPYC 74F3 vs Celeron M 560

VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron M 560
2008
1 core / 1 thread, 30 Watt
0.34
EPYC 74F3
2021
24 cores / 48 threads, 240 Watt
38.19
+11132%

EPYC 74F3 outperforms Celeron M 560 by a whopping 11132% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron M 560 and EPYC 74F3 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking307877
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data11.20
Market segmentLaptopServer
SeriesIntel Celeron MAMD EPYC
Power efficiency1.0715.06
Architecture codenameMerom (2006−2008)Milan (2021−2023)
Release date1 May 2008 (16 years ago)12 January 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$2,900

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron M 560 and EPYC 74F3 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)24 (Tetracosa-Core)
Threads148
Base clock speedno data2.8 GHz
Boost clock speed2.13 GHz4 GHz
Bus rate533 MHzno data
Multiplierno data32
L1 cache64 KB1536 KB
L2 cache1 MB12 MB
L3 cacheno data256 MB (shared)
Chip lithography65 nm7 nm+
Die size143 mm24x 81 mm2
Maximum core temperature100 °Cno data
Number of transistors291 Million33,200 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+

Compatibility

Information on Celeron M 560 and EPYC 74F3 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 data2
SocketPPGA478SP3
Power consumption (TDP)30 Watt240 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M 560 and EPYC 74F3. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI-+
AVX-+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron M 560 and EPYC 74F3 are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron M 560 and EPYC 74F3. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR4-3200
Maximum memory sizeno data4 TiB
Maximum memory bandwidthno data204.795 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataN/A

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron M 560 and EPYC 74F3.

PCIe versionno data4.0
PCI Express lanesno data128

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 560 0.34
EPYC 74F3 38.19
+11132%

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 560 535
EPYC 74F3 60666
+11239%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.34 38.19
Recency 1 May 2008 12 January 2021
Physical cores 1 24
Threads 1 48
Chip lithography 65 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 30 Watt 240 Watt

Celeron M 560 has 700% lower power consumption.

EPYC 74F3, on the other hand, has a 11132.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 12 years, 2300% more physical cores and 4700% more threads, and a 828.6% more advanced lithography process.

The EPYC 74F3 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron M 560 in performance tests.

Be aware that Celeron M 560 is a notebook processor while EPYC 74F3 is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M 560 and EPYC 74F3, 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 560
Celeron M 560
AMD EPYC 74F3
EPYC 74F3

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.


2.7 43 votes

Rate Celeron M 560 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5 2 votes

Rate EPYC 74F3 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron M 560 or EPYC 74F3, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.