Celeron N2840 vs EPYC 9754
Primary details
Comparing EPYC 9754 and Celeron N2840 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 12 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 1.03 | no data |
| Market segment | Server | Laptop |
| Series | no data | Intel Celeron |
| Power efficiency | 16.62 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Bergamo (2023) | Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) |
| Release date | 13 June 2023 (1 year ago) | 22 May 2014 (10 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $11,900 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
EPYC 9754 and Celeron N2840 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 | 128 | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 256 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | 2.25 GHz | 2.16 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.1 GHz | 2.58 GHz |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 56K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 512K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 256 MB (shared) | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 22 nm |
| Die size | 8x 73 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 100 °C |
| Number of transistors | 71,000 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | no data | - |
Compatibility
Information on EPYC 9754 and Celeron N2840 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 | 2 | 1 |
| Socket | SP5 | FCBGA1170 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 360 Watt | 7.5 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 9754 and Celeron N2840. 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 | + |
| Smart Connect | no data | + |
| Precision Boost 2 | + | no data |
Security technologies
EPYC 9754 and Celeron N2840 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| EDB | no data | + |
| Secure Key | no data | + |
| Anti-Theft | no data | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by EPYC 9754 and Celeron N2840 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 EPYC 9754 and Celeron N2840. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR5 | DDR3 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 8 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 21.32 GB/s |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | N/A | Intel® HD Graphics for Intel Atom® Processor Z3700 Series |
| Quick Sync Video | - | + |
| Graphics max frequency | no data | 792 MHz |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of EPYC 9754 and Celeron N2840 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | no data | 2 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by EPYC 9754 and Celeron N2840.
| PCIe version | 5.0 | 2.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 128 | 4 |
| USB revision | no data | 3.0 and 2.0 |
| Total number of SATA ports | no data | 2 |
| Number of USB ports | no data | 5 |
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 13 June 2023 | 22 May 2014 |
| Physical cores | 128 | 2 |
| Threads | 256 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 22 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 360 Watt | 7 Watt |
EPYC 9754 has an age advantage of 9 years, 6300% more physical cores and 12700% more threads, and a 340% more advanced lithography process.
Celeron N2840, on the other hand, has 5042.9% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between EPYC 9754 and Celeron N2840. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that EPYC 9754 is a server/workstation processor while Celeron N2840 is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between EPYC 9754 and Celeron N2840, 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.
