EPYC 9475F vs Celeron 1017U

VS

Primary details

Comparing Celeron 1017U and EPYC 9475F processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking2511not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopServer
SeriesIntel Celeronno data
Power efficiency5.26no data
Architecture codenameIvy Bridge (2012−2013)Turin (2024)
Release date1 July 2013 (11 years ago)10 October 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$7,592

Detailed specifications

Celeron 1017U and EPYC 9475F 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 cores2 (Dual-core)48 (Octatetraconta-Core)
Threads296
Base clock speed1.6 GHz3.65 GHz
Boost clock speed1.6 GHz4.8 GHz
Bus rate5 GT/sno data
L1 cache128 KB80 KB (per core)
L2 cache512 KB1 MB (per core)
L3 cache2 MB256 MB (shared)
Chip lithography22 nm4 nm
Die size94 mm28x 70.6 mm2
Maximum core temperature105 °Cno data
Number of transistorsno data66,520 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data

Compatibility

Information on Celeron 1017U and EPYC 9475F 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 configuration12
SocketFCBGA1023SP5
Power consumption (TDP)17 Watt400 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 1017U and EPYC 9475F. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2no data
AES-NI-+
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
My WiFi-no data
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Flex Memory Access+no data
Demand Based Switching-no data
FDI+no data
Fast Memory Access+no data
Precision Boost 2no data+

Security technologies

Celeron 1017U and EPYC 9475F technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-no data
EDB+no data
Anti-Theft-no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron 1017U and EPYC 9475F are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
VT-d-no data
VT-x+no data
EPT+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron 1017U and EPYC 9475F. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR5
Maximum memory size32 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidth25.6 GB/sno data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel HD Graphics for 3rd Generation Intel ProcessorsN/A
Graphics max frequency1 GHzno data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron 1017U and EPYC 9475F integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported3no data
eDP+no data
DisplayPort+-
HDMI+-
SDVO+no data
CRT+no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron 1017U and EPYC 9475F.

PCIe version2.05.0
PCI Express lanes16128

Pros & cons summary


Recency 1 July 2013 10 October 2024
Physical cores 2 48
Threads 2 96
Chip lithography 22 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 17 Watt 400 Watt

Celeron 1017U has 2252.9% lower power consumption.

EPYC 9475F, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 11 years, 2300% more physical cores and 4700% more threads, and a 450% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Celeron 1017U and EPYC 9475F. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Celeron 1017U is a notebook processor while EPYC 9475F is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron 1017U and EPYC 9475F, 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.


Intel Celeron 1017U
Celeron 1017U
AMD EPYC 9475F
EPYC 9475F

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.


2.8 71 vote

Rate Celeron 1017U on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate EPYC 9475F on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron 1017U or EPYC 9475F, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.