Celeron M 900 vs Ryzen 5 1400

Primary details

Comparing Ryzen 5 1400 and Celeron M 900 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking1227not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation2.78no data
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
SeriesAMD Ryzen 5Intel Celeron M
Power efficiency7.11no data
Architecture codenameZen (2017−2020)Penryn (2008−2011)
Release date16 March 2017 (7 years ago)1 April 2009 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$169$70

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Ryzen 5 1400 and Celeron M 900 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)
Threads81
Base clock speed3.2 GHzno data
Boost clock speed3.2 GHz2.2 GHz
Bus rate4 × 8 GT/s800 MHz
Multiplier32no data
L1 cache384 KBno data
L2 cache2 MB1 MB
L3 cache8 MB (shared)no data
Chip lithography14 nm45 nm
Die size213 mm2107 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data105 °C
Number of transistors4800 Million410 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplier+-

Compatibility

Information on Ryzen 5 1400 and Celeron M 900 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
SocketAM4PGA478
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 5 1400 and Celeron M 900. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsXFR, FMA3, SSE 4.2, AVX2, SMTno data
AES-NI+-
AVX+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 5 1400 and Celeron M 900 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 5 1400 and Celeron M 900. 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 5 1400 and Celeron M 900.

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 5 1400 7753
+6203%
Celeron M 900 123

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

Ryzen 5 1400 4205
+100%
Celeron M 900 2101

3DMark06 CPU

3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.

Ryzen 5 1400 6437
+544%
Celeron M 900 1000

Pros & cons summary


Recency 16 March 2017 1 April 2009
Physical cores 4 1
Threads 8 1
Chip lithography 14 nm 45 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 35 Watt

Ryzen 5 1400 has an age advantage of 7 years, 300% more physical cores and 700% more threads, and a 221.4% more advanced lithography process.

Celeron M 900, on the other hand, has 85.7% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Ryzen 5 1400 and Celeron M 900. We've got no test results to judge.

Note that Ryzen 5 1400 is a desktop processor while Celeron M 900 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 5 1400 and Celeron M 900, 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 5 1400
Ryzen 5 1400
Intel Celeron M 900
Celeron M 900

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.


4 745 votes

Rate Ryzen 5 1400 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 21 vote

Rate Celeron M 900 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Ryzen 5 1400 or Celeron M 900, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.