Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 vs Celeron E1600

VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron E1600
2009
2 cores / 2 threads, 65 Watt
0.53
Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360
2024
8 cores / 16 AMD Zen 5 AMD Zen 5c threads, 28 Watt
14.11
+2562%

Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 outperforms Celeron E1600 by a whopping 2562% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron E1600 and Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking2869521
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
Seriesno dataAMD Strix Point (Zen 5/5c, Ryzen AI 3/5/7/9)
Power efficiency0.7747.69
Architecture codenameAllendale (2006−2009)Strix Point (Zen 5) (2024)
Release date31 May 2009 (15 years ago)1 October 2024 (less than a year ago)

Detailed specifications

Celeron E1600 and Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 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 AMD Zen 5 AMD Zen 5c
Base clock speed2.4 GHzno data
Boost clock speed2.4 GHz5.1 GHz
Bus rateno data54 MHz
L1 cache64 KB (per core)no data
L2 cache512 KB (shared)no data
L3 cache0 KBno data
Chip lithography65 nm4 nm
Die size77 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature73 °Cno data
Number of transistors105 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data
VID voltage range0.85V-1.5Vno data

Compatibility

Information on Celeron E1600 and Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 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 configuration1no data
SocketLGA775FP8
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt28 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron E1600 and Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataUSB 4, XDNA 2 NPU (50 TOPS), Secure Processor, SMT, AES, AVX, AVX2, AVX512, FMA3, MMX (+), SHA, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, SSE4A
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

Security technologies

Celeron E1600 and Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 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 E1600 and Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 are enumerated here.

VT-d-no data
VT-x-no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron E1600 and Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR1, DDR2, DDR3DDR5

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardOn certain motherboards (Chipset feature)AMD Radeon 880M

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron E1600 and Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360.

PCIe version2.0no 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 E1600 0.53
Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 14.11
+2562%

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 E1600 840
Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 22406
+2567%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.53 14.11
Recency 31 May 2009 1 October 2024
Physical cores 2 8
Threads 2 16 AMD Zen 5 AMD Zen 5c
Chip lithography 65 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 28 Watt

Celeron E1600 has -87.5% more threads.

Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360, on the other hand, has a 2562.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 15 years, 300% more physical cores, a 1525% more advanced lithography process, and 132.1% lower power consumption.

The Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron E1600 in performance tests.

Note that Celeron E1600 is a desktop processor while Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron E1600 and Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360, 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 E1600
Celeron E1600
AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360
Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360

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.


3.4 5 votes

Rate Celeron E1600 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.5 2 votes

Rate Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron E1600 or Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.