Celeron M 383 vs Ryzen 5 1600
Primary details
Comparing Ryzen 5 1600 and Celeron M 383 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 948 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | 44 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 4.37 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | AMD Ryzen 5 | Celeron M |
| Power efficiency | 11.26 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Zen 2 (2017−2020) | Dothan (2004−2005) |
| Release date | 16 March 2017 (7 years ago) | no data (2024 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $219 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Ryzen 5 1600 and Celeron M 383 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 | 6 (Hexa-Core) | 1 (Single-Core) |
| Threads | 12 | 1 |
| Base clock speed | 3.2 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 3.2 GHz | 1 GHz |
| Bus rate | 4 × 8 GT/s | 400 MHz |
| Multiplier | 32 | no data |
| L1 cache | 576 KB | no data |
| L2 cache | 3 MB | no data |
| L3 cache | 16 MB (shared) | no data |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 90 nm |
| Die size | 213 mm2 | no data |
| Number of transistors | 4800 Million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | - |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | + | - |
Compatibility
Information on Ryzen 5 1600 and Celeron M 383 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 | 1 (Uniprocessor) | no data |
| Socket | AM4 | no data |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 5 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 5 1600 and Celeron M 383. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | XFR, FMA3, SSE 4.2, AVX2, SMT | no data |
| AES-NI | + | - |
| AVX | + | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 5 1600 and Celeron M 383 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 5 1600 and Celeron M 383. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 | no data |
| Maximum memory size | 64 GB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 2 | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 42.671 GB/s | no data |
| ECC memory support | + | - |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 5 1600 and Celeron M 383.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | no data |
| PCI Express lanes | 20 | no data |
Pros & cons summary
| Physical cores | 6 | 1 |
| Threads | 12 | 1 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 90 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 5 Watt |
Ryzen 5 1600 has 500% more physical cores and 1100% more threads, and a 542.9% more advanced lithography process.
Celeron M 383, on the other hand, has 1200% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Ryzen 5 1600 and Celeron M 383. We've got no test results to judge.
Note that Ryzen 5 1600 is a desktop processor while Celeron M 383 is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 5 1600 and Celeron M 383, 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.
