EPYC 7551P vs Celeron G1620

Place in the ranking	2439	201
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.03	4.46
Market segment	Desktop processor	Server
Series	no data	AMD EPYC
Architecture codename	Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)	Naples (2017−2018)
Release date	3 December 2012 (11 years ago)	20 June 2017 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$208	$2,100

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

EPYC 7551P has 14767% better value for money than Celeron G1620.

Detailed specifications

Celeron G1620 and EPYC 7551P 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)	32 (Dotriaconta-Core)
Threads	2	64
Base clock speed	2.7 GHz	2 GHz
Boost clock speed	2.7 GHz	2 GHz
Bus rate	5 GT/s	no data
Multiplier	no data	20
L1 cache	64 KB (per core)	3 MB
L2 cache	256 KB (per core)	16 MB
L3 cache	2 MB (shared)	64 MB (shared)
Chip lithography	22 nm	14 nm
Die size	94 mm²	213 mm²
Maximum case temperature (TCase)	65 °C	no data
Number of transistors	no data	19200 Million
64 bit support	+	+
Windows 11 compatibility	-	-
Unlocked multiplier	-	+

Compatibility

Information on Celeron G1620 and EPYC 7551P 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	1 (Uniprocessor)
Socket	FCLGA1155	TR4
Power consumption (TDP)	55 Watt	180 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron G1620 and EPYC 7551P. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensions	Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2	no data
AES-NI	-	+
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	+	-
Status	Discontinued	no data

Security technologies

Celeron G1620 and EPYC 7551P technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

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

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron G1620 and EPYC 7551P are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron G1620 and EPYC 7551P. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory types	DDR3	DDR4 Eight-channel
Maximum memory size	32 GB	2 TiB
Max memory channels	2	8
Maximum memory bandwidth	21 GB/s	170.671 GB/s
ECC memory support	+	+

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card	Intel® HD Graphics for 3rd Generation Intel® Processors	no data
Graphics max frequency	1.05 GHz	no data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron G1620 and EPYC 7551P integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported

no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron G1620 and EPYC 7551P.

PCIe version	2.0	3.0
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. 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 G1620 1.01

EPYC 7551P 24.77
+2352%

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 G1620 1560

EPYC 7551P 38126
+2344%

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.

Celeron G1620 415

EPYC 7551P 926
+123%

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.

Celeron G1620 720

EPYC 7551P 6068
+743%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	1.01	24.77
Recency	3 December 2012	20 June 2017
Physical cores	2	32
Threads	2	64
Chip lithography	22 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	55 Watt	180 Watt

Celeron G1620 has 227.3% lower power consumption.

EPYC 7551P, on the other hand, has a 2352.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, 1500% more physical cores and 3100% more threads, and a 57.1% more advanced lithography process.

The EPYC 7551P is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron G1620 in performance tests.

Note that Celeron G1620 is a desktop processor while EPYC 7551P is a server/workstation one.

Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron G1620 and EPYC 7551P, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.