Ryzen 3 3250U vs Celeron 925

VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron 925
2011
35 Watt
0.30
Ryzen 3 3250U
2020
2 cores / 4 threads, 15 Watt
2.40
+700%

Ryzen 3 3250U outperforms Celeron 925 by a whopping 700% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron 925 and Ryzen 3 3250U processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking31121781
Place by popularitynot in top-10080
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Seriesno dataAMD Ryzen 3
Power efficiency0.8115.06
Architecture codenameno dataPicasso (2019−2022)
Release date1 January 2011 (13 years ago)6 January 2020 (4 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Celeron 925 and Ryzen 3 3250U 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 coresno data2 (Dual-core)
Threadsno data4
Base clock speed2.3 GHz2.6 GHz
Boost clock speedno data3.5 GHz
Multiplierno data26
L1 cacheno data128K (per core)
L2 cacheno data512K (per core)
L3 cache1 MB L2 Cache4 MB (shared)
Chip lithography45 nm12 nm
Die sizeno data246 mm2
Maximum core temperature105 °C95 °C
Number of transistorsno data4500 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+

Compatibility

Information on Celeron 925 and Ryzen 3 3250U 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 configurationno data1
Socketno dataFP5
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 925 and Ryzen 3 3250U. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataMMX, 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
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
Precision Boost 2no data+

Security technologies

Celeron 925 and Ryzen 3 3250U 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 925 and Ryzen 3 3250U are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
VT-x-no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron 925 and Ryzen 3 3250U. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR4
Maximum memory sizeno data32 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
Maximum memory bandwidthno data38.397 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataAMD Radeon RX Vega 3 ( - 1200 MHz)

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron 925 and Ryzen 3 3250U.

PCIe versionno data3.0
PCI Express lanesno data12

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 925 0.30
Ryzen 3 3250U 2.40
+700%

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 925 477
Ryzen 3 3250U 3809
+699%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.30 2.40
Recency 1 January 2011 6 January 2020
Chip lithography 45 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 15 Watt

Ryzen 3 3250U has a 700% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 275% more advanced lithography process, and 133.3% lower power consumption.

The Ryzen 3 3250U is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron 925 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron 925 and Ryzen 3 3250U, 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 925
Celeron 925
AMD Ryzen 3 3250U
Ryzen 3 3250U

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.


No user ratings yet.

Rate Celeron 925 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 2143 votes

Rate Ryzen 3 3250U on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron 925 or Ryzen 3 3250U, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.