EPYC 7F32 vs Celeron B820

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron B820
2012
2 cores / 2 threads, 35 Watt
0.53
EPYC 7F32
2020
8 cores / 16 threads, 180 Watt
15.36
+2798%

EPYC 7F32 outperforms Celeron B820 by a whopping 2798% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron B820 and EPYC 7F32 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking2839467
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data3.86
Market segmentLaptopServer
SeriesIntel CeleronAMD EPYC
Power efficiency1.387.77
Architecture codenameSandy Bridge (2011−2013)Zen 2 (2017−2020)
Release date1 July 2012 (12 years ago)14 April 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$86$2,100

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron B820 and EPYC 7F32 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)8 (Octa-Core)
Threads216
Base clock speed1.7 GHz3.7 GHz
Boost clock speed1.7 GHz3.9 GHz
Bus typeDMI 2.0no data
Bus rate4 × 5 GT/sno data
Multiplier1737
L1 cache64K (per core)96K (per core)
L2 cache256K (per core)512K (per core)
L3 cache2 MB (shared)128 MB (shared)
Chip lithography32 nm7 nm, 14 nm
Die size131 mm274 mm2
Maximum core temperature100 °Cno data
Number of transistors504 million3,800 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplier-+

Compatibility

Information on Celeron B820 and EPYC 7F32 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)1
SocketFCPGA988,PGA988SP3
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt180 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron B820 and EPYC 7F32. 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
My WiFi-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
StatusDiscontinuedno data
Precision Boost 2no data+

Security technologies

Celeron B820 and EPYC 7F32 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-no data
EDB+no data
Anti-Theft-no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron B820 and EPYC 7F32 are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
VT-d-no data
VT-x+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron B820 and EPYC 7F32. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR4-3200
Maximum memory size16 GB4 TiB
Max memory channels28
Maximum memory bandwidth21.335 GB/s204.763 GB/s
ECC memory support-+

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel® HD Graphics for 2nd Generation Intel® Processorsno data
Graphics max frequency1.05 GHzno data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron B820 and EPYC 7F32 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 B820 and EPYC 7F32.

PCIe version2.04.0
PCI Express lanes16no data

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 B820 0.53
EPYC 7F32 15.36
+2798%

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 B820 811
EPYC 7F32 23453
+2792%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.53 15.36
Recency 1 July 2012 14 April 2020
Physical cores 2 8
Threads 2 16
Chip lithography 32 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 180 Watt

Celeron B820 has 414.3% lower power consumption.

EPYC 7F32, on the other hand, has a 2798.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, 300% more physical cores and 700% more threads, and a 357.1% more advanced lithography process.

The EPYC 7F32 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron B820 in performance tests.

Be aware that Celeron B820 is a notebook processor while EPYC 7F32 is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron B820 and EPYC 7F32, 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 B820
Celeron B820
AMD EPYC 7F32
EPYC 7F32

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.


2.8 134 votes

Rate Celeron B820 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 3 votes

Rate EPYC 7F32 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron B820 or EPYC 7F32, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.