EPYC 7H12 vs Celeron 3765U

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron 3765U
2015
2 cores / 2 threads, 15 Watt
0.79
EPYC 7H12
2019
64 cores / 128 threads, 280 Watt
43.84
+5449%

EPYC 7H12 outperforms Celeron 3765U by a whopping 5449% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron 3765U and EPYC 7H12 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking263148
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopServer
SeriesIntel CeleronAMD EPYC
Power efficiency4.9914.83
Architecture codenameBroadwell (2015−2019)Zen 2 (2017−2020)
Release date1 June 2015 (9 years ago)18 September 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$107no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron 3765U and EPYC 7H12 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)64 (Tetrahexaconta-Core)
Threads2128
Base clock speed1.9 GHz2.6 GHz
Boost clock speed1.9 GHz3.3 GHz
Bus rate5 GT/sno data
Multiplierno data26
L1 cache128 KB96K (per core)
L2 cache512 KB512K (per core)
L3 cache2 MB256 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm7 nm, 14 nm
Die size82 mm2192 mm2
Maximum core temperature105 °Cno data
Number of transistors1300 Million4,800 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplier-+

Compatibility

Information on Celeron 3765U and EPYC 7H12 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 (Multiprocessor)
SocketFCBGA1168TR4
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt280 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 3765U and EPYC 7H12. 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
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Flex Memory Access+no data
Smart Response-no data
FDI+no data
Fast Memory Access+no data
Precision Boost 2no data+

Security technologies

Celeron 3765U and EPYC 7H12 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-no data
EDB+no data
Secure Key+no data
Identity Protection+-
OS Guard-no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron 3765U and EPYC 7H12 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 3765U and EPYC 7H12. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR4 Eight-channel
Maximum memory size16 GB4 TiB
Max memory channels28
Maximum memory bandwidth25.6 GB/s204.763 GB/s
ECC memory support-+

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel HD Graphics for 5th Generation Intel Processorsno data
Quick Sync Video+-
Clear Video+no data
Graphics max frequency850 MHzno data
InTru 3D+no data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron 3765U and EPYC 7H12 integrated GPUs.

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

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Celeron 3765U and EPYC 7H12 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectX11.2/12no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron 3765U and EPYC 7H12.

PCIe version2.0no data
PCI Express lanes12no 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.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

Celeron 3765U 0.79
EPYC 7H12 43.84
+5449%

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.

Celeron 3765U 1252
EPYC 7H12 69633
+5462%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.79 43.84
Recency 1 June 2015 18 September 2019
Physical cores 2 64
Threads 2 128
Chip lithography 14 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 280 Watt

Celeron 3765U has 1766.7% lower power consumption.

EPYC 7H12, on the other hand, has a 5449.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, 3100% more physical cores and 6300% more threads, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

The EPYC 7H12 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron 3765U in performance tests.

Be aware that Celeron 3765U is a notebook processor while EPYC 7H12 is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron 3765U and EPYC 7H12, 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 3765U
Celeron 3765U
AMD EPYC 7H12
EPYC 7H12

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.


No user ratings yet.

Rate Celeron 3765U on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 452 votes

Rate EPYC 7H12 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron 3765U or EPYC 7H12, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.