EPYC 7H12 vs Celeron N3160

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron N3160
2016
4 cores / 4 threads, 6 Watt
0.75
EPYC 7H12
2019
64 cores / 128 threads, 280 Watt
43.84
+5745%

EPYC 7H12 outperforms Celeron N3160 by a whopping 5745% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron N3160 and EPYC 7H12 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking265248
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopServer
SeriesIntel CeleronAMD EPYC
Power efficiency17.7414.82
Architecture codenameBraswell (2015−2016)Zen 2 (2017−2020)
Release date15 January 2016 (8 years ago)18 September 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$107no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron N3160 and EPYC 7H12 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)64 (Tetrahexaconta-Core)
Threads4128
Base clock speed1.6 GHz2.6 GHz
Boost clock speed2.24 GHz3.3 GHz
Bus typeIDIno data
Multiplierno data26
L1 cacheno data96K (per core)
L2 cache2 MB512K (per core)
L3 cache0 KB256 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm7 nm, 14 nm
Die sizeno data192 mm2
Maximum core temperature90 °Cno data
Number of transistorsno data4,800 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplier-+

Compatibility

Information on Celeron N3160 and EPYC 7H12 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 configuration1 (Uniprocessor)2 (Multiprocessor)
SocketFCBGA1170TR4
Power consumption (TDP)6 Watt280 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron N3160 and EPYC 7H12. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI++
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Smart Response-no data
GPIO+no data
Smart Connect-no data
HD Audio+no data
RST-no data
Precision Boost 2no data+

Security technologies

Celeron N3160 and EPYC 7H12 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-no data
EDB+no data
Secure Boot+no data
Secure Key+no data
Identity Protection+-
OS Guard-no data
Anti-Theft-no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron N3160 and EPYC 7H12 are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
VT-d-no data
VT-x+no data
VT-i-no data
EPT+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron N3160 and EPYC 7H12. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR4 Eight-channel
Maximum memory size8 GB4 TiB
Max memory channels28
Maximum memory bandwidthno data204.763 GB/s
ECC memory support-+

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel HD Graphics (Braswell) (320 - 640 MHz)no data
Max video memory8 GBno data
Quick Sync Video+-
Clear Video+no data
Clear Video HD+no data
Graphics max frequency640 MHzno data
Execution Units12no data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron N3160 and EPYC 7H12 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported3no data
eDP+no data
DisplayPort+-
HDMI+-

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Celeron N3160 and EPYC 7H12 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectX+no data
OpenGL+no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron N3160 and EPYC 7H12.

PCIe version2.0no data
PCI Express lanes4no data
USB revision2.0/3.0no data
Total number of SATA ports2no data
Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Ports2no data
Number of USB ports5no data
Integrated LAN-no data
UART+no data

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 N3160 0.75
EPYC 7H12 43.84
+5745%

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 N3160 1192
EPYC 7H12 69633
+5742%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.75 43.84
Recency 15 January 2016 18 September 2019
Physical cores 4 64
Threads 4 128
Chip lithography 14 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 6 Watt 280 Watt

Celeron N3160 has 4566.7% lower power consumption.

EPYC 7H12, on the other hand, has a 5745.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, 1500% more physical cores and 3100% more threads, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

The EPYC 7H12 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron N3160 in performance tests.

Be aware that Celeron N3160 is a notebook processor while EPYC 7H12 is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron N3160 and EPYC 7H12, 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 N3160
Celeron N3160
AMD EPYC 7H12
EPYC 7H12

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.


4.6 195 votes

Rate Celeron N3160 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 450 votes

Rate EPYC 7H12 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron N3160 or EPYC 7H12, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.