Ryzen 7 7840HS vs Celeron M 900

Aggregate performance score

Celeron M 900
2009
1 core / 1 thread, 35 Watt
0.08
Ryzen 7 7840HS
2023
8 cores / 16 threads, 35 Watt
18.20
+22650%

Ryzen 7 7840HS outperforms Celeron M 900 by a whopping 22650% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron M 900 and Ryzen 7 7840HS processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking3385327
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel Celeron Mno data
Power efficiency0.2249.21
Architecture codenamePenryn (2008−2011)Phoenix-HS (Zen 4) (2023)
Release date1 April 2009 (15 years ago)January 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$70no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron M 900 and Ryzen 7 7840HS 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)8 (Octa-Core)
Threads116
Base clock speedno data3.8 GHz
Boost clock speed2.2 GHz5.1 GHz
Bus rate800 MHzno data
L1 cacheno data64K (per core)
L2 cache1 MB1 MB (per core)
L3 cacheno data16 MB (shared)
Chip lithography45 nm4 nm
Die size107 mm2178 mm2
Maximum core temperature105 °C100 °C
Number of transistors410 Million25,000 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+

Compatibility

Information on Celeron M 900 and Ryzen 7 7840HS 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
SocketPGA478FP8
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M 900 and Ryzen 7 7840HS. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataRyzen AI, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512, BMI2, ABM, FMA, ADX, SMEP, SMAP, SMT, CPB, AES-NI, RDRAND, RDSEED, SHA, SME
AES-NI-+
FMA-+
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Precision Boost 2no data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron M 900 and Ryzen 7 7840HS are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron M 900 and Ryzen 7 7840HS. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR5

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataAMD Radeon 780M ( - 2700 MHz)

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron M 900 and Ryzen 7 7840HS.

PCIe versionno data4.0
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.


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 900 0.08
Ryzen 7 7840HS 18.20
+22650%

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 900 123
Ryzen 7 7840HS 28908
+23402%

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 900 2101
Ryzen 7 7840HS 7642
+264%

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 900 1000
Ryzen 7 7840HS 15663
+1466%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.08 18.20
Physical cores 1 8
Threads 1 16
Chip lithography 45 nm 4 nm

Ryzen 7 7840HS has a 22650% higher aggregate performance score, 700% more physical cores and 1500% more threads, and a 1025% more advanced lithography process.

The Ryzen 7 7840HS is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron M 900 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M 900 and Ryzen 7 7840HS, 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 900
Celeron M 900
AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS
Ryzen 7 7840HS

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 21 vote

Rate Celeron M 900 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.5 1640 votes

Rate Ryzen 7 7840HS on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron M 900 or Ryzen 7 7840HS, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.