Ryzen 3 3200U vs Celeron M 575

VS

Primary details

Comparing Celeron M 575 and Ryzen 3 3200U processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the rankingnot rated1772
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel Celeron MAMD Ryzen 3
Power efficiencyno data15.08
Architecture codenameMerom (2006−2008)Picasso-U (Zen) (2019)
Release date1 June 2008 (16 years ago)6 January 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$86no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron M 575 and Ryzen 3 3200U 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)2 (Dual-core)
Threads14
Base clock speedno data2.6 GHz
Boost clock speed2 GHz3.5 GHz
Bus typeno dataPCIe 3.0
Bus rate667 MHzno data
Multiplierno data26
L1 cacheno data192 KB
L2 cache1 MB1 MB
L3 cacheno data4 MB (shared)
Chip lithography65 nm12 nm
Die size143 mm2209.78 mm2
Maximum core temperature100 °C105 °C
Number of transistors291 Million4940 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+

Compatibility

Information on Celeron M 575 and Ryzen 3 3200U 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)
SocketPPGA478FP5
Power consumption (TDP)31 Watt15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M 575 and Ryzen 3 3200U. 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-+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron M 575 and Ryzen 3 3200U are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron M 575 and Ryzen 3 3200U. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR4
Maximum memory sizeno data64 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
Maximum memory bandwidthno data38.397 GB/s
ECC memory support-+

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataAMD Radeon RX Vega 3

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron M 575 and Ryzen 3 3200U.

PCIe versionno data3.0
PCI Express lanesno data12

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.



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 575 1917
Ryzen 3 3200U 4258
+122%

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.

Celeron M 575 1917
Ryzen 3 3200U 9284
+384%

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 575 898
Ryzen 3 3200U 3755
+318%

Pros & cons summary


Recency 1 June 2008 6 January 2019
Physical cores 1 2
Threads 1 4
Chip lithography 65 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 31 Watt 15 Watt

Ryzen 3 3200U has an age advantage of 10 years, 100% more physical cores and 300% more threads, a 441.7% more advanced lithography process, and 106.7% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Celeron M 575 and Ryzen 3 3200U. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M 575 and Ryzen 3 3200U, 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 575
Celeron M 575
AMD Ryzen 3 3200U
Ryzen 3 3200U

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.


3.4 9 votes

Rate Celeron M 575 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 1452 votes

Rate Ryzen 3 3200U on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron M 575 or Ryzen 3 3200U, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.