Ryzen 5 7600X vs Celeron P1053
Primary details
Comparing Celeron P1053 and Ryzen 5 7600X processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | 340 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 69 |
| Market segment | Server | Desktop processor |
| Series | no data | AMD Ryzen 5 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 16.16 |
| Architecture codename | Jasper Forest (2010) | Raphael (Zen4) (2022−2023) |
| Release date | 12 February 2010 (14 years ago) | 27 September 2022 (2 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Celeron P1053 and Ryzen 5 7600X 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) | 6 (Hexa-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 12 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 4.7 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.33 GHz | 5.3 GHz |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 384 KB |
| L2 cache | 256 KB (per core) | 6 MB |
| L3 cache | 2 MB (shared) | 32 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 5 nm, 6 nm |
| Die size | no data | 70 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 95 °C |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 61 °C |
| Number of transistors | no data | CCD: 6,5 Mrd + IOD: 3,4 Mrd Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
| Unlocked multiplier | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron P1053 and Ryzen 5 7600X 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 | 1 | 1 |
| Socket | 1366 | AM5 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 30 Watt | 105 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron P1053 and Ryzen 5 7600X. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | 5 nm, 0.650 - 1.475V |
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| Precision Boost 2 | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron P1053 and Ryzen 5 7600X are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
| VT-d | + | no data |
| VT-x | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron P1053 and Ryzen 5 7600X. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR5-5200 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 128 GB |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | AMD Radeon Graphics (Ryzen 7000) |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron P1053 and Ryzen 5 7600X.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | 5.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 24 |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 12 February 2010 | 27 September 2022 |
| Physical cores | 1 | 6 |
| Threads | 2 | 12 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 30 Watt | 105 Watt |
Celeron P1053 has 250% lower power consumption.
Ryzen 5 7600X, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 12 years, 500% more physical cores and 500% more threads, and a 800% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Celeron P1053 and Ryzen 5 7600X. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that Celeron P1053 is a server/workstation processor while Ryzen 5 7600X is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron P1053 and Ryzen 5 7600X, 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.
