Celeron 847 vs Ryzen 5 1600

VS

Primary details

Comparing Ryzen 5 1600 and Celeron 847 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking952not rated
Place by popularity44not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation4.50no data
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
SeriesAMD Ryzen 5Intel Celeron
Power efficiency11.25no data
Architecture codenameZen 2 (2017−2020)Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)
Release date11 April 2017 (7 years ago)19 June 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$219$134

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Ryzen 5 1600 and Celeron 847 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 cores6 (Hexa-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads122
Base clock speed3.2 GHz1.1 GHz
Boost clock speed3.6 GHz1.1 GHz
Bus typeno dataDMI 2.0
Bus rate4 × 8 GT/s4 × 5 GT/s
Multiplier3211
L1 cache96K (per core)64K (per core)
L2 cache512K (per core)256K (per core)
L3 cache16 MB (shared)2 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm32 nm
Die size192 mm2131 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data100 °C
Number of transistors4,800 million504 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplier+-

Compatibility

Information on Ryzen 5 1600 and Celeron 847 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)1 (Uniprocessor)
SocketAM4FCBGA1023
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt17 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 5 1600 and Celeron 847. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsXFR, FMA3, SSE 4.2, AVX2, SMTIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2
AES-NI+-
FMA-+
AVX+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Flex Memory Accessno data+
Demand Based Switchingno data-
FDIno data+
Fast Memory Accessno data+

Security technologies

Ryzen 5 1600 and Celeron 847 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 5 1600 and Celeron 847 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-dno data-
VT-xno data+
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 5 1600 and Celeron 847. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4DDR3
Maximum memory size64 GB16 GB
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidth42.671 GB/s21.335 GB/s
ECC memory support+-

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card-Intel HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)
Clear Video HD--
Graphics max frequency-800 MHz

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Ryzen 5 1600 and Celeron 847 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported-2
eDP-+
DisplayPort-+
HDMI-+
SDVO-+
CRT-+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 5 1600 and Celeron 847.

PCIe version3.02.0
PCI Express lanes2016

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 1600 12277
+2468%
Celeron 847 478

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.

Ryzen 5 1600 1084
+590%
Celeron 847 157

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.

Ryzen 5 1600 4637
+1670%
Celeron 847 262

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 1600 4538
+257%
Celeron 847 1270

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

Ryzen 5 1600 25970
+979%
Celeron 847 2408

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 1600 8244
+731%
Celeron 847 993

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 5 1600 6.85
+1074%
Celeron 847 80.4

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.

Ryzen 5 1600 13
+1834%
Celeron 847 1

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R11.5 is an old benchmark by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version loads a single thread with ray tracing to render a glossy room full of crystal spheres and light sources.

Ryzen 5 1600 1.65
+302%
Celeron 847 0.41

TrueCrypt AES

TrueCrypt is a discontinued piece of software that was widely used for on-the-fly-encryption of disk partitions, now superseded by VeraCrypt. It contains several embedded performance tests, one of them being TrueCrypt AES, which measures data encryption speed using AES algorithm. Result is encryption speed in gigabytes per second.

Ryzen 5 1600 6.4
+7900%
Celeron 847 0.1

WinRAR 4.0

WinRAR 4.0 is an outdated version of a popular file archiver. It contains an internal speed test, using 'Best' setting of RAR compression on large chunks of randomly generated data. Its results are measured in kilobytes per second.

Ryzen 5 1600 3430
+316%
Celeron 847 824

Geekbench 2

Ryzen 5 1600 16217
+705%
Celeron 847 2014

Pros & cons summary


Recency 11 April 2017 19 June 2011
Physical cores 6 2
Threads 12 2
Chip lithography 14 nm 32 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 17 Watt

Ryzen 5 1600 has an age advantage of 5 years, 200% more physical cores and 500% more threads, and a 128.6% more advanced lithography process.

Celeron 847, on the other hand, has 282.4% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Ryzen 5 1600 and Celeron 847. We've got no test results to judge.

Note that Ryzen 5 1600 is a desktop processor while Celeron 847 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 5 1600 and Celeron 847, 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 1600
Ryzen 5 1600
Intel Celeron 847
Celeron 847

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.


4.1 5762 votes

Rate Ryzen 5 1600 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 384 votes

Rate Celeron 847 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Ryzen 5 1600 or Celeron 847, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.