Ryzen 3 3100 vs Celeron 847E
Aggregate performance score
Ryzen 3 3100 outperforms Celeron 847E by a whopping 1948% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 3328 | 1192 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.01 | 33.70 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | Intel Celeron | Matisse (Ryzen 3000 Desktop) |
| Power efficiency | 2.08 | 11.15 |
| Designer | Intel | AMD |
| Manufacturer | no data | TSMC |
| Architecture codename | Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) | Matisse (Zen 2) (2019−2020) |
| Release date | no data | 24 April 2020 (5 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $111 | $99 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Ryzen 3 3100 has 336900% better value for money than Celeron 847E.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
Celeron 847E and Ryzen 3 3100 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 | 3.6 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.1 GHz | 3.9 GHz |
| Bus type | DMI 2.0 | no data |
| Bus rate | 4 × 5 GT/s | no data |
| Multiplier | 11 | no data |
| L1 cache | 128 KB | 96K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 512 KB | 512K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 2 MB | 16 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 7 nm |
| Die size | 131 mm2 | 74 mm2 |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 95 °C |
| Number of transistors | 504 Million | 3,800 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
| Unlocked multiplier | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron 847E and Ryzen 3 3100 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 | AM4 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 17 Watt | 65 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 847E and Ryzen 3 3100. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | 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 |
| Precision Boost 2 | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron 847E and Ryzen 3 3100 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
| VT-x | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron 847E and Ryzen 3 3100. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3-1333 | DDR4 |
| Maximum memory size | 16 GB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 2 | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 21.335 GB/s | no data |
| ECC memory support | + | - |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Intel HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron 847E and Ryzen 3 3100.
| PCIe version | no data | 4.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 16 |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
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. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.
GeekBench 5 Single-Core
GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.33 | 6.76 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 4 |
| Threads | 2 | 8 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 17 Watt | 65 Watt |
Celeron 847E has 282.4% lower power consumption.
Ryzen 3 3100, on the other hand, has a 1948.5% higher aggregate performance score, 100% more physical cores and 300% more threads, and a 357.1% more advanced lithography process.
The AMD Ryzen 3 3100 is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Celeron 847E in performance tests.
Be aware that Celeron 847E is a notebook processor while Ryzen 3 3100 is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
