Ryzen 3 PRO 5450U vs Celeron 817
Primary details
Comparing Celeron 817 and Ryzen 3 PRO 5450U processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | 1002 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | Intel Celeron | AMD Cezanne (Zen 3, Ryzen 5000) |
| Power efficiency | no data | 43.77 |
| Architecture codename | Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) | Cezanne-U PRO (Zen 3) (2021) |
| Release date | no data (2024 years ago) | 16 March 2021 (3 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Celeron 817 and Ryzen 3 PRO 5450U 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 cores | 2 (Dual-core) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 8 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 2.6 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.6 GHz | 4 GHz |
| Bus type | DMI 2.0 | no data |
| Bus rate | 4 × 5 GT/s | no data |
| Multiplier | 16 | 26 |
| L1 cache | 128 KB | 64K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 512 KB | 512K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 2 MB | 8 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 7 nm |
| Die size | 131 mm2 | 180 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 105 °C |
| Number of transistors | 504 Million | 10,700 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron 817 and Ryzen 3 PRO 5450U 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 configuration | 1 (Uniprocessor) | 1 |
| Socket | no data | FP6 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 17 Watt | 15 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 817 and Ryzen 3 PRO 5450U. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | PRO, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, BMI2, ABM, FMA, ADX, SMEP, SMAP, SMT, CPB, AES-NI, RDRAND, RDSEED, SHA, SME |
| AES-NI | - | + |
| FMA | + | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron 817 and Ryzen 3 PRO 5450U are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
| VT-x | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron 817 and Ryzen 3 PRO 5450U. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR4 |
| Maximum memory size | 16 GB | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 21.335 GB/s | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | Intel HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) | AMD Radeon RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron 817 and Ryzen 3 PRO 5450U.
| PCIe version | no data | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 8 |
Pros & cons summary
| Physical cores | 2 | 4 |
| Threads | 2 | 8 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 17 Watt | 15 Watt |
Ryzen 3 PRO 5450U has 100% more physical cores and 300% more threads, a 357.1% more advanced lithography process, and 13.3% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Celeron 817 and Ryzen 3 PRO 5450U. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron 817 and Ryzen 3 PRO 5450U, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
