EPYC 9555P vs Celeron Dual-Core T3500
Primary details
Comparing Celeron Dual-Core T3500 and EPYC 9555P processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2596 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Server |
| Series | Intel Celeron Dual-Core | no data |
| Power efficiency | 2.16 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Penryn (2008−2011) | Turin (2024) |
| Release date | 26 September 2010 (14 years ago) | 10 October 2024 (less than a year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $80 | $7,983 |
Detailed specifications
Celeron Dual-Core T3500 and EPYC 9555P 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) | 64 (Tetrahexaconta-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 128 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 3.2 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.1 GHz | 4.4 GHz |
| Bus rate | 800 MHz | no data |
| L1 cache | 128 KB | 80 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 1 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | no data | 256 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 4 nm |
| Die size | 107 mm2 | 8x 70.6 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 410 Million | 66,520 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron Dual-Core T3500 and EPYC 9555P 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 | no data | 1 |
| Socket | Socket P PGA478 | SP5 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 360 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron Dual-Core T3500 and EPYC 9555P. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| Precision Boost 2 | no data | + |
Security technologies
Celeron Dual-Core T3500 and EPYC 9555P technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| EDB | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron Dual-Core T3500 and EPYC 9555P are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron Dual-Core T3500 and EPYC 9555P. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR5 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | N/A |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron Dual-Core T3500 and EPYC 9555P.
| PCIe version | no data | 5.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 128 |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 26 September 2010 | 10 October 2024 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 64 |
| Threads | 2 | 128 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 4 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 360 Watt |
Celeron Dual-Core T3500 has 928.6% lower power consumption.
EPYC 9555P, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 14 years, 3100% more physical cores and 6300% more threads, and a 1025% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Celeron Dual-Core T3500 and EPYC 9555P. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that Celeron Dual-Core T3500 is a notebook processor while EPYC 9555P is a server/workstation one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron Dual-Core T3500 and EPYC 9555P, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
