EPYC Embedded 8434P vs Celeron T1600
Primary details
Comparing Celeron T1600 and EPYC Embedded 8434P processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Server |
| Architecture codename | no data | Siena (2023−2024) |
| Release date | 1 October 2008 (16 years ago) | 1 October 2024 (less than a year ago) |
Detailed specifications
Celeron T1600 and EPYC Embedded 8434P 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 | no data | 48 (Octatetraconta-Core) |
| Threads | no data | 96 |
| Base clock speed | 1.66 GHz | 2.5 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 3.1 GHz |
| L1 cache | no data | 64 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | no data | 1 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 1 MB L2 Cache | 128 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 5 nm |
| Die size | no data | 4x 73 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | no data |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 75 °C |
| Number of transistors | no data | 35,500 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | no data |
| VID voltage range | 1.075V-1.175V | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron T1600 and EPYC Embedded 8434P 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 | PPGA478 | SP6 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 200 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron T1600 and EPYC Embedded 8434P. 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 |
| Demand Based Switching | - | no data |
| Precision Boost 2 | no data | + |
Security technologies
Celeron T1600 and EPYC Embedded 8434P technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | - | no data |
| EDB | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron T1600 and EPYC Embedded 8434P are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
| VT-x | - | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron T1600 and EPYC Embedded 8434P. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR5 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | N/A |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron T1600 and EPYC Embedded 8434P.
| PCIe version | no data | 5.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 96 |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 1 October 2008 | 1 October 2024 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 200 Watt |
Celeron T1600 has 471.4% lower power consumption.
EPYC Embedded 8434P, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 16 years, and a 1200% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Celeron T1600 and EPYC Embedded 8434P. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that Celeron T1600 is a notebook processor while EPYC Embedded 8434P is a server/workstation one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron T1600 and EPYC Embedded 8434P, 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.
