Ryzen 9 7940HS vs Celeron M U3400

Primary details

Comparing Celeron M U3400 and Ryzen 9 7940HS processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the rankingnot rated301
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel Celeron Mno data
Power efficiencyno data51.73
Architecture codenameArrandale (2010−2011)Phoenix-HS (Zen 4) (2023)
Release date24 May 2010 (14 years ago)January 2023 (1 year ago)

Detailed specifications

Celeron M U3400 and Ryzen 9 7940HS 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 cores2 (Dual-core)8 (Octa-Core)
Threads216
Base clock speedno data4 GHz
Boost clock speed1.06 GHz5.2 GHz
Bus rate2500 MHzno data
L1 cacheno data64K (per core)
L2 cache512 KB1 MB (per core)
L3 cache2 MB16 MB (shared)
Chip lithography32 nm4 nm
Die size81+114 mm2178 mm2
Maximum core temperature105 °C100 °C
Number of transistors382+177 Million25,000 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+

Compatibility

Information on Celeron M U3400 and Ryzen 9 7940HS 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
SocketBGA1288FP8
Power consumption (TDP)18 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M U3400 and Ryzen 9 7940HS. 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
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Flex Memory Access+no data
Fast Memory Access+no data
Precision Boost 2no data+

Security technologies

Celeron M U3400 and Ryzen 9 7940HS technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

EDB+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron M U3400 and Ryzen 9 7940HS are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
VT-x+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron M U3400 and Ryzen 9 7940HS. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR5

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataAMD Radeon 780M

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron M U3400 and Ryzen 9 7940HS.

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.



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 U3400 1205
Ryzen 9 7940HS 7837
+550%

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 U3400 2317
Ryzen 9 7940HS 48751
+2004%

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 U3400 988
Ryzen 9 7940HS 15689
+1488%

wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

Celeron M U3400 62.2
Ryzen 9 7940HS 2.7
+2204%

Pros & cons summary


Physical cores 2 8
Threads 2 16
Chip lithography 32 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 18 Watt 35 Watt

Celeron M U3400 has 94.4% lower power consumption.

Ryzen 9 7940HS, on the other hand, has 300% more physical cores and 700% more threads, and a 700% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Celeron M U3400 and Ryzen 9 7940HS. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M U3400 and Ryzen 9 7940HS, 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 U3400
Celeron M U3400
AMD Ryzen 9 7940HS
Ryzen 9 7940HS

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 4 votes

Rate Celeron M U3400 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.4 997 votes

Rate Ryzen 9 7940HS on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron M U3400 or Ryzen 9 7940HS, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.