Celeron M 360 vs Ryzen 3 1200

VS

Primary details

Comparing Ryzen 3 1200 and Celeron M 360 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking1405not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation4.19no data
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
SeriesAMD Ryzen 3Celeron M
Power efficiency5.87no data
Architecture codenameSummit Ridge (Zen) (2017)Dothan (2004−2005)
Release date27 July 2017 (7 years ago)no data (2024 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$109no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Ryzen 3 1200 and Celeron M 360 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)1 (Single-Core)
Threads41
Base clock speed3.1 GHz1.4 GHz
Boost clock speed3.1 GHz1.4 GHz
Bus rate4 × 8 GT/s400 MHz
Multiplier31no data
L1 cache384 KBno data
L2 cache2 MBno data
L3 cache8 MB (shared)1 MB L2 KB
Chip lithography14 nm90 nm
Die size213 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature95 °C100 °C
Number of transistors4800 Millionno data
64 bit support+-
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage rangeno data1.26V, 1.004V-1.292V

Compatibility

Information on Ryzen 3 1200 and Celeron M 360 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 configuration1 (Uniprocessor)no data
SocketAM4PPGA478, H-PBGA479
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt21 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 3 1200 and Celeron M 360. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsMMX (+), SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, SSE4A, AES, AVX, AVX2, FMA3, SHAno data
AES-NI+-
AVX+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data-
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data-
Demand Based Switchingno data-
PAEno data32 Bit
FSB parityno data-

Security technologies

Ryzen 3 1200 and Celeron M 360 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
EDBno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 3 1200 and Celeron M 360 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-xno data-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 3 1200 and Celeron M 360. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4no data
Maximum memory size64 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidth42.671 GB/sno data
ECC memory support+-

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 3 1200 and Celeron M 360.

PCIe version3.0no data
PCI Express lanes20no data

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.

Ryzen 3 1200 6407
+2799%
Celeron M 360 221

wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

Ryzen 3 1200 12.5
+948%
Celeron M 360 131

Pros & cons summary


Physical cores 4 1
Threads 4 1
Chip lithography 14 nm 90 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 21 Watt

Ryzen 3 1200 has 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads, and a 542.9% more advanced lithography process.

Celeron M 360, on the other hand, has 209.5% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Ryzen 3 1200 and Celeron M 360. We've got no test results to judge.

Note that Ryzen 3 1200 is a desktop processor while Celeron M 360 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 3 1200 and Celeron M 360, 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.


AMD Ryzen 3 1200
Ryzen 3 1200
Intel Celeron M 360
Celeron M 360

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.


3.9 2787 votes

Rate Ryzen 3 1200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 12 votes

Rate Celeron M 360 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Ryzen 3 1200 or Celeron M 360, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.