EPYC 9555 vs Celeron 827E

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron 827E
1 core / 1 thread, 17 Watt
0.23
EPYC 9555
2024
64 cores / 128 threads, 360 Watt
83.20
+36074%

EPYC 9555 outperforms Celeron 827E by a whopping 36074% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron 827E and EPYC 9555 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking32066
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data3.05
Market segmentLaptopServer
SeriesIntel Celeronno data
Power efficiency1.2922.02
Architecture codenameSandy Bridge (2011−2013)Turin (2024)
Release dateno data10 October 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$89$9,826

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron 827E and EPYC 9555 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 speedno data3.2 GHz
Boost clock speed1.4 GHz4.4 GHz
Bus typeDMI 2.0no data
Bus rate4 × 5 GT/sno data
Multiplier14no data
L1 cache64 KB80 KB (per core)
L2 cache256 KB1 MB (per core)
L3 cache1.5 MB256 MB (shared)
Chip lithography32 nm4 nm
Die size131 mm28x 70.6 mm2
Number of transistors504 Million66,520 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data

Compatibility

Information on Celeron 827E and EPYC 9555 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 configuration1 (Uniprocessor)2
Socketno dataSP5
Power consumption (TDP)17 Watt360 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 827E and EPYC 9555. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI-+
FMA+-
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Precision Boost 2no data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron 827E and EPYC 9555 are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
VT-x+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron 827E and EPYC 9555. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3-1066DDR5
Maximum memory size16 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidth21.335 GB/sno data
ECC memory support+-

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)N/A

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron 827E and EPYC 9555.

PCIe versionno data5.0
PCI Express lanesno data128

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 827E 0.23
EPYC 9555 83.20
+36074%

  • Passmark

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 827E 371
EPYC 9555 133253
+35817%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.23 83.20
Physical cores 1 64
Threads 1 128
Chip lithography 32 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 17 Watt 360 Watt

Celeron 827E has 2017.6% lower power consumption.

EPYC 9555, on the other hand, has a 36073.9% higher aggregate performance score, 6300% more physical cores and 12700% more threads, and a 700% more advanced lithography process.

The EPYC 9555 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron 827E in performance tests.

Be aware that Celeron 827E is a notebook processor while EPYC 9555 is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron 827E and EPYC 9555, 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 827E
Celeron 827E
AMD EPYC 9555
EPYC 9555

Other comparisons

We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


No user ratings yet.

Rate Celeron 827E on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5
1 vote

Rate EPYC 9555 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron 827E or EPYC 9555, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.