EPYC 7543 vs Celeron M 722
Primary details
Comparing Celeron M 722 and EPYC 7543 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | 77 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 7.63 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Server |
| Series | Intel Celeron M | AMD EPYC |
| Power efficiency | no data | 16.13 |
| Architecture codename | Penryn (2008−2011) | Milan (2021−2023) |
| Release date | 1 October 2008 (16 years ago) | 15 March 2021 (3 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $3,761 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Celeron M 722 and EPYC 7543 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) | 32 (Dotriaconta-Core) |
| Threads | 1 | 64 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 2.8 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.2 GHz | 3.7 GHz |
| Bus rate | 800 MHz | no data |
| Multiplier | no data | 28 |
| L1 cache | 64 KB | 64 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 512 KB (per core) |
| L3 cache | no data | 256 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 7 nm+ |
| Die size | 107 mm2 | 8x 81 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 410 Million | 33,200 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron M 722 and EPYC 7543 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 | 2 |
| Socket | VGA956 | SP3 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 5.5 Watt | 225 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M 722 and EPYC 7543. 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 722 and EPYC 7543 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron M 722 and EPYC 7543. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR4-3200 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 4 TiB |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 204.795 GB/s |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | N/A |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron M 722 and EPYC 7543.
| PCIe version | no data | 4.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 128 |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 1 October 2008 | 15 March 2021 |
| Physical cores | 1 | 32 |
| Threads | 1 | 64 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 5 Watt | 225 Watt |
Celeron M 722 has 4400% lower power consumption.
EPYC 7543, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 12 years, 3100% more physical cores and 6300% more threads, and a 542.9% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Celeron M 722 and EPYC 7543. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that Celeron M 722 is a notebook processor while EPYC 7543 is a server/workstation one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M 722 and EPYC 7543, 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.
