EPYC 9255 vs Celeron 430

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

Comparing Celeron 430 and EPYC 9255 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking3247not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorServer
Power efficiency0.49no 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)$50$2,495

Detailed specifications

Celeron 430 and EPYC 9255 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)24 (Tetracosa-Core)
Threads148
Base clock speed1.8 GHz3.25 GHz
Boost clock speed1.8 GHz4.8 GHz
L1 cache64 KB80 KB (per core)
L2 cache512 KB1 MB (per core)
L3 cache0 KB128 MB (shared)
Chip lithography65 nm4 nm
Die size77 mm24x 70.6 mm2
Maximum core temperature60 °Cno data
Number of transistors105 million33,260 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data
VID voltage range1V-1.3375Vno data

Compatibility

Information on Celeron 430 and EPYC 9255 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 Watt200 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 430 and EPYC 9255. 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 430 and EPYC 9255 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 430 and EPYC 9255 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 430 and EPYC 9255. 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 430 and EPYC 9255.

PCIe versionno data5.0
PCI Express lanesno data128

Pros & cons summary


Physical cores 1 24
Threads 1 48
Chip lithography 65 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 200 Watt

Celeron 430 has 471.4% lower power consumption.

EPYC 9255, on the other hand, has 2300% more physical cores and 4700% more threads, and a 1525% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Celeron 430 and EPYC 9255. We've got no test results to judge.

Note that Celeron 430 is a desktop processor while EPYC 9255 is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron 430 and EPYC 9255, 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 430
Celeron 430
AMD EPYC 9255
EPYC 9255

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.


2.6 159 votes

Rate Celeron 430 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate EPYC 9255 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron 430 or EPYC 9255, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.