EPYC 9634 vs Celeron E1500
Aggregate performance score
EPYC 9634 outperforms Celeron E1500 by a whopping 16964% 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 | 3239 | 23 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 2.27 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Server |
| Series | no data | AMD EPYC |
| Power efficiency | 0.23 | 8.95 |
| Designer | Intel | AMD |
| Manufacturer | Intel | TSMC |
| Architecture codename | Allendale (2006−2009) | Genoa (2022−2023) |
| Release date | 30 November 2008 (16 years ago) | 10 November 2022 (2 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $63 | $10,304 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
Celeron E1500 and EPYC 9634 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) | 84 |
| Threads | 2 | 168 |
| Base clock speed | 2.2 GHz | 2.25 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.2 GHz | 3.7 GHz |
| Multiplier | no data | 22.5 |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 64K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 512 KB (shared) | 1 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 384 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 5 nm, 6 nm |
| Die size | 77 mm2 | 12x 72 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 73 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 105 million | 78,840 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | no data |
| VID voltage range | 0.85V-1.5V | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron E1500 and EPYC 9634 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 | 2 |
| Socket | LGA775 | SP5 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 290 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron E1500 and EPYC 9634. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | no data |
| Idle States | + | no data |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | - |
| Demand Based Switching | - | no data |
| FSB parity | - | no data |
| Precision Boost 2 | no data | + |
Security technologies
Celeron E1500 and EPYC 9634 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 E1500 and EPYC 9634 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 E1500 and EPYC 9634. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR1, DDR2, DDR3 | DDR5-4800 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 6 TiB |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 460.8 GB/s |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron E1500 and EPYC 9634.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | 5.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 128 |
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.36 | 61.43 |
| Recency | 30 November 2008 | 10 November 2022 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 84 |
| Threads | 2 | 168 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 290 Watt |
Celeron E1500 has 346.2% lower power consumption.
EPYC 9634, on the other hand, has a 16963.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 13 years, 4100% more physical cores and 8300% more threads, and a 1200% more advanced lithography process.
The AMD EPYC 9634 is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Celeron E1500 in performance tests.
Note that Celeron E1500 is a desktop processor while EPYC 9634 is a server/workstation one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
