Ryzen 3 3250U vs Celeron T1600

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

Comparing Celeron T1600 and Ryzen 3 3250U processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the rankingnot rated1765
Place by popularitynot in top-10096
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Seriesno dataAMD Ryzen 3
Power efficiencyno data15.14
Architecture codenameno dataPicasso (2019−2022)
Release date1 October 2008 (16 years ago)6 January 2020 (4 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Celeron T1600 and Ryzen 3 3250U 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 coresno data2 (Dual-core)
Threadsno data4
Base clock speed1.66 GHz2.6 GHz
Boost clock speedno data3.5 GHz
Multiplierno data26
L1 cacheno data192 KB
L2 cacheno data1 MB
L3 cache1 MB L2 Cache4 MB (shared)
Chip lithography65 nm14 nm
Die sizeno data246 mm2
Maximum core temperature100 °C95 °C
Number of transistorsno data4500 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
VID voltage range1.075V-1.175Vno data

Compatibility

Information on Celeron T1600 and Ryzen 3 3250U 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
SocketPPGA478FP5
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron T1600 and Ryzen 3 3250U. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataMMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, BMI2, ABM, FMA, ADX, SMEP, SMAP, SMT, CPB, AES-NI, RDRAND, RDSEED, SHA, SME
AES-NI-+
FMA-+
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 2no data+

Security technologies

Celeron T1600 and Ryzen 3 3250U 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 Ryzen 3 3250U are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
VT-x-no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron T1600 and Ryzen 3 3250U. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR4
Maximum memory sizeno data32 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
Maximum memory bandwidthno data38.397 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataAMD Radeon RX Vega 3

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron T1600 and Ryzen 3 3250U.

PCIe versionno data3.0
PCI Express lanesno data12

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.



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 T1600 551
Ryzen 3 3250U 3809
+591%

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

Celeron T1600 192
Ryzen 3 3250U 749
+290%

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

Celeron T1600 353
Ryzen 3 3250U 1455
+312%

Pros & cons summary


Recency 1 October 2008 6 January 2020
Chip lithography 65 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 15 Watt

Ryzen 3 3250U has an age advantage of 11 years, a 364.3% more advanced lithography process, and 133.3% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Celeron T1600 and Ryzen 3 3250U. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron T1600 and Ryzen 3 3250U, 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 T1600
Celeron T1600
AMD Ryzen 3 3250U
Ryzen 3 3250U

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.


2.6 7 votes

Rate Celeron T1600 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 2111 votes

Rate Ryzen 3 3250U on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron T1600 or Ryzen 3 3250U, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.