Ryzen 7 5700X vs Celeron M 560
Primary details
Comparing Celeron M 560 and Ryzen 7 5700X processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | 384 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 23 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 39.15 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | Intel Celeron M | no data |
| Power efficiency | no data | 24.44 |
| Architecture codename | Merom (2006−2008) | Vermeer (Zen 3) (2020−2022) |
| Release date | 1 May 2008 (16 years ago) | 4 April 2022 (2 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $299 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Celeron M 560 and Ryzen 7 5700X 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) | 8 (Octa-Core) |
| Threads | 1 | 16 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 3.4 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.13 GHz | 4.6 GHz |
| Bus rate | 533 MHz | no data |
| L1 cache | 64 KB | 64K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 512K (per core) |
| L3 cache | no data | 32 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 7 nm |
| Die size | 143 mm2 | 81 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | 90 °C |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 95 °C |
| Number of transistors | 291 Million | 4,150 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
| Unlocked multiplier | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron M 560 and Ryzen 7 5700X 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 |
| Socket | PPGA478 | AM4 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 30 Watt | 65 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M 560 and Ryzen 7 5700X. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | 86x MMX(+), SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, SSE4A,-64, AMD-V, AES, AVX, AVX2, FMA3, SHA, Precision Boost 2 |
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| Precision Boost 2 | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron M 560 and Ryzen 7 5700X are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron M 560 and Ryzen 7 5700X. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR4-3200 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron M 560 and Ryzen 7 5700X.
| PCIe version | no data | 4.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 20 |
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.
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.
Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core
Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 1 May 2008 | 4 April 2022 |
| Physical cores | 1 | 8 |
| Threads | 1 | 16 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 30 Watt | 65 Watt |
Celeron M 560 has 116.7% lower power consumption.
Ryzen 7 5700X, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 13 years, 700% more physical cores and 1500% more threads, and a 828.6% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Celeron M 560 and Ryzen 7 5700X. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that Celeron M 560 is a notebook processor while Ryzen 7 5700X is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M 560 and Ryzen 7 5700X, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
