Ryzen 3 7320U vs Celeron M U3600
Primary details
Comparing Celeron M U3600 and Ryzen 3 7320U processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | 1146 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | Intel Celeron M | Mendocino (Zen 2, Ryzen 7020) |
| Power efficiency | no data | 35.14 |
| Architecture codename | Arrandale (2010−2011) | Mendocino-U (Zen 2) (2022) |
| Release date | 18 December 2010 (13 years ago) | 20 September 2022 (2 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Celeron M U3600 and Ryzen 3 7320U 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 | 2 (Dual-core) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 8 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 2.4 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.2 GHz | 4.1 GHz |
| Bus rate | 2500 MHz | no data |
| L1 cache | no data | 64 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 512 KB | 512 KB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 2 MB | 4 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 6 nm |
| Die size | 81+114 mm2 | 100 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 382+177 Million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron M U3600 and Ryzen 3 7320U 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 | BGA1288 | FP6 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 18 Watt | 15 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M U3600 and Ryzen 3 7320U. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | MMX (+), SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, SSE4A, AES, AVX, AVX2, FMA3, SHA |
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| Idle States | + | no data |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | - |
| Flex Memory Access | + | no data |
| Fast Memory Access | + | no data |
Security technologies
Celeron M U3600 and Ryzen 3 7320U 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 U3600 and Ryzen 3 7320U are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
| VT-x | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron M U3600 and Ryzen 3 7320U. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR5 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | AMD Radeon 610M |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron M U3600 and Ryzen 3 7320U.
| PCIe version | no data | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 4 |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 18 December 2010 | 20 September 2022 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 4 |
| Threads | 2 | 8 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 6 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 18 Watt | 15 Watt |
Ryzen 3 7320U has an age advantage of 11 years, 100% more physical cores and 300% more threads, a 433.3% more advanced lithography process, and 20% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Celeron M U3600 and Ryzen 3 7320U. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M U3600 and Ryzen 3 7320U, 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.
