EPYC 9575F vs Celeron 420

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

Comparing Celeron 420 and EPYC 9575F processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking3319not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorServer
Power efficiency0.40no data
Architecture codenameConroe-L (2007−2008)Turin (2024)
Release dateJune 2007 (17 years ago)10 October 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$23$11,791

Detailed specifications

Celeron 420 and EPYC 9575F 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)64 (Tetrahexaconta-Core)
Threads1128
Base clock speed1.6 GHz3.3 GHz
Boost clock speed1.6 GHz5 GHz
L1 cache64 KB80 KB (per core)
L2 cache512 KB1 MB (per core)
L3 cache0 KB256 MB (shared)
Chip lithography65 nm4 nm
Die size77 mm28x 70.6 mm2
Maximum case temperature (TCase)60 °Cno data
Number of transistors105 million66,520 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data
VID voltage range1V-1.3375Vno data

Compatibility

Information on Celeron 420 and EPYC 9575F 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
SocketLGA775SP5
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt400 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 420 and EPYC 9575F. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI-+
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)-no data
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Demand Based Switching-no data
FSB parity-no data
Precision Boost 2no data+

Security technologies

Celeron 420 and EPYC 9575F technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-no data
EDB+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron 420 and EPYC 9575F are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron 420 and EPYC 9575F. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR1, DDR2, DDR3DDR5

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataN/A

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron 420 and EPYC 9575F.

PCIe versionno data5.0
PCI Express lanesno data128

Pros & cons summary


Physical cores 1 64
Threads 1 128
Chip lithography 65 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 400 Watt

Celeron 420 has 1042.9% lower power consumption.

EPYC 9575F, on the other hand, has 6300% more physical cores and 12700% more threads, and a 1525% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Celeron 420 and EPYC 9575F. We've got no test results to judge.

Note that Celeron 420 is a desktop processor while EPYC 9575F is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron 420 and EPYC 9575F, 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 420
Celeron 420
AMD EPYC 9575F
EPYC 9575F

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.


2.9 169 votes

Rate Celeron 420 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate EPYC 9575F on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron 420 or EPYC 9575F, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.