EPYC 9645 vs Celeron 847

VS

Primary details

Comparing Celeron 847 and EPYC 9645 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking3113not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopServer
SeriesIntel Celeronno data
Power efficiency1.67no data
Architecture codenameSandy Bridge (2011−2013)Turin (2024)
Release date19 June 2011 (13 years ago)10 October 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$134$11,048

Detailed specifications

Celeron 847 and EPYC 9645 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)96
Threads2192
Base clock speed1.1 GHz2.3 GHz
Boost clock speed1.1 GHz3.7 GHz
Bus typeDMI 2.0no data
Bus rate4 × 5 GT/sno data
Multiplier11no data
L1 cache64K (per core)80 KB (per core)
L2 cache256K (per core)1 MB (per core)
L3 cache2 MB (shared)256 MB (shared)
Chip lithography32 nm3 nm
Die size131 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature100 °Cno data
Number of transistors504 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data

Compatibility

Information on Celeron 847 and EPYC 9645 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
SocketFCBGA1023SP5
Power consumption (TDP)17 Watt320 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 847 and EPYC 9645. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2no data
AES-NI-+
FMA+-
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Flex Memory Access+no data
Demand Based Switching-no data
FDI+no data
Fast Memory Access+no data
Precision Boost 2no data+

Security technologies

Celeron 847 and EPYC 9645 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 847 and EPYC 9645 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 847 and EPYC 9645. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR5
Maximum memory size16 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidth21.335 GB/sno data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) (350 - 800 MHz)N/A
Graphics max frequency800 MHzno data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron 847 and EPYC 9645 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported2no data
eDP+no data
DisplayPort+-
HDMI+-
SDVO+no data
CRT+no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron 847 and EPYC 9645.

PCIe version2.05.0
PCI Express lanes16128

Pros & cons summary


Recency 19 June 2011 10 October 2024
Physical cores 2 96
Threads 2 192
Chip lithography 32 nm 3 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 17 Watt 320 Watt

Celeron 847 has 1782.4% lower power consumption.

EPYC 9645, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 13 years, 4700% more physical cores and 9500% more threads, and a 966.7% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Celeron 847 and EPYC 9645. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Celeron 847 is a notebook processor while EPYC 9645 is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron 847 and EPYC 9645, 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 847
Celeron 847
AMD EPYC 9645
EPYC 9645

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.


2.8 389 votes

Rate Celeron 847 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate EPYC 9645 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron 847 or EPYC 9645, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.