EPYC 74F3 vs Celeron T3000
Primary details
Comparing Celeron T3000 and EPYC 74F3 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | 77 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 10.55 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Server |
| Series | no data | AMD EPYC |
| Power efficiency | no data | 15.06 |
| Architecture codename | no data | Milan (2021−2023) |
| Release date | 1 April 2009 (15 years ago) | 15 March 2021 (3 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $2,900 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Celeron T3000 and EPYC 74F3 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) | 24 (Tetracosa-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 48 |
| Base clock speed | 1.8 GHz | 2.8 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 4 GHz |
| Multiplier | no data | 32 |
| L1 cache | no data | 64 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | no data | 512 KB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 1 MB L2 Cache | 256 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 7 nm+ |
| Die size | no data | 4x 81 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 105 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | no data | 33,200 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
| VID voltage range | 1V-1.25V | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron T3000 and EPYC 74F3 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 | 2 |
| Socket | PGA478 | SP3 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 240 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron T3000 and EPYC 74F3. 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 |
| Demand Based Switching | - | no data |
Security technologies
Celeron T3000 and EPYC 74F3 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 T3000 and EPYC 74F3 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
| VT-x | - | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron T3000 and EPYC 74F3. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR4-3200 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 4 TiB |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 204.795 GB/s |
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 T3000 and EPYC 74F3.
| PCIe version | no data | 4.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 128 |
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.
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 1 April 2009 | 15 March 2021 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 24 |
| Threads | 2 | 48 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 240 Watt |
Celeron T3000 has 585.7% lower power consumption.
EPYC 74F3, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 11 years, 1100% more physical cores and 2300% more threads, and a 542.9% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Celeron T3000 and EPYC 74F3. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that Celeron T3000 is a notebook processor while EPYC 74F3 is a server/workstation one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron T3000 and EPYC 74F3, 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.
