EPYC 9654 vs Celeron E3500

#ad
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregated performance score

Celeron E3500
2010
2 cores / 2 threads
0.60
EPYC 9654
2022
96 cores / 192 threads
78.29
+12948%

EPYC 9654 outperforms Celeron E3500 by 12948% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

General info

Comparing Celeron E3500 and EPYC 9654 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking26574
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Value for money2.9910.14
Market segmentDesktop processorServer
Seriesno dataAMD EPYC
Architecture codenameWolfdale (2008−2010)Genoa
Release date29 August 2010 (13 years ago)10 November 2022 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$62$11,805
Current price$14.99 (0.2x MSRP)$4544 (0.4x MSRP)

Value for money

Performance per price, higher is better.

EPYC 9654 has 239% better value for money than Celeron E3500.

Technical specs

Celeron E3500 and EPYC 9654 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)96
Threads2192
Base clock speed2.7 GHz2.4 GHz
Boost clock speed2.7 GHz3.7 GHz
L1 cache64 KB (per core)64K (per core)
L2 cache1 MB (shared)1 MB (per core)
L3 cache0 KB384 MB (shared)
Chip lithography45 nm5 nm, 6 nm
Die size82 mm212x 72 mm2
Maximum core temperature74 °Cno data
Number of transistors228 million78,840 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data
Unlocked multiplierNoNo
VID voltage range0.85V-1.3625Vno data

Compatibility

Information on Celeron E3500 and EPYC 9654 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 configuration12
SocketLGA775SP5
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt360 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron E3500 and EPYC 9654. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE2, Intel® SSE3, Intel® SSSE3no data
AES-NI-+
AVXno data+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+no data
StatusDiscontinuedno data

Security technologies

Celeron E3500 and EPYC 9654 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 E3500 and EPYC 9654 are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron E3500 and EPYC 9654. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR1, DDR2, DDR3DDR5-4800
Maximum memory sizeno data6 TiB
Maximum memory bandwidthno data460.8 GB/s

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron E3500 and EPYC 9654.

PCIe version2.05.0
PCI Express lanesno data128

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 E3500 0.60
EPYC 9654 78.29
+12948%

EPYC 9654 outperforms Celeron E3500 by 12948% based on our aggregated benchmark results.


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.

Benchmark coverage: 68%

Celeron E3500 935
EPYC 9654 122091
+12958%

EPYC 9654 outperforms Celeron E3500 by 12958% in Passmark.

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

Benchmark coverage: 42%

Celeron E3500 290
EPYC 9654 1829
+531%

EPYC 9654 outperforms Celeron E3500 by 531% in GeekBench 5 Single-Core.

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

Benchmark coverage: 42%

Celeron E3500 443
EPYC 9654 18566
+4091%

EPYC 9654 outperforms Celeron E3500 by 4091% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.

Gaming performance

Advantages and disadvantages


Performance score 0.60 78.29
Recency 29 August 2010 10 November 2022
Physical cores 2 96
Threads 2 192
Cost $62 $11805
Chip lithography 45 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 360 Watt

The EPYC 9654 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron E3500 in performance tests.

Be aware that Celeron E3500 is a desktop processor while EPYC 9654 is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron E3500 and EPYC 9654, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


Intel Celeron E3500
Celeron E3500
AMD EPYC 9654
EPYC 9654

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.

User Ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


3.4 23 votes

Rate Celeron E3500 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 978 votes

Rate EPYC 9654 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions and comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron E3500 or EPYC 9654, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.