Ryzen Threadripper 1976X vs Celeron 2.20

VS

Primary details

Comparing Celeron 2.20 and Ryzen Threadripper 1976X processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking3395not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Power efficiency0.12no data
Architecture codenameNorthwood (2002−2004)Zen (2017−2020)
Release dateNovember 2002 (22 years ago)no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron 2.20 and Ryzen Threadripper 1976X 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 cores1 (Single-Core)12 (Dodeca-Core)
Threads1no data
Boost clock speed2.2 GHz3.6 GHz
L1 cache8 KB128 KB (per core)
L2 cache128 KB512 KB (per core)
L3 cache0 KB32768 KB
Chip lithography130 nm14 nm
Die size146 mm2no data
Number of transistors55 millionno data
64 bit support-+
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplier-+

Compatibility

Information on Celeron 2.20 and Ryzen Threadripper 1976X 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 configuration11
Socket478SP3r2
Power consumption (TDP)73 Watt125 Watt

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron 2.20 and Ryzen Threadripper 1976X are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron 2.20 and Ryzen Threadripper 1976X. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR1, DDR2DDR4

Pros & cons summary


Physical cores 1 12
Chip lithography 130 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 73 Watt 125 Watt

Celeron 2.20 has 71.2% lower power consumption.

Ryzen Threadripper 1976X, on the other hand, has 1100% more physical cores, and a 828.6% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Celeron 2.20 and Ryzen Threadripper 1976X. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron 2.20 and Ryzen Threadripper 1976X, 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 2.20
Celeron 2.20
AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1976X
Ryzen Threadripper 1976X

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.


3.3 14 votes

Rate Celeron 2.20 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate Ryzen Threadripper 1976X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron 2.20 or Ryzen Threadripper 1976X, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.