Ryzen 3 3200U vs Celeron G1620

Primary details

Comparing Celeron G1620 and Ryzen 3 3200U processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking	2477	1789
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.05	no data
Market segment	Desktop processor	Laptop
Series	no data	AMD Ryzen 3
Power efficiency	1.69	14.94
Architecture codename	Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)	Picasso-U (Zen) (2019)
Release date	3 December 2012 (12 years ago)	6 January 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$208	no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Detailed specifications

Celeron G1620 and Ryzen 3 3200U 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)	2 (Dual-core)
Threads	2	4
Base clock speed	2.7 GHz	2.6 GHz
Boost clock speed	2.7 GHz	3.5 GHz
Bus type	no data	PCIe 3.0
Bus rate	5 GT/s	no data
Multiplier	no data	26
L1 cache	64 KB (per core)	128K (per core)
L2 cache	256 KB (per core)	512K (per core)
L3 cache	2 MB (shared)	4 MB (shared)
Chip lithography	22 nm	12 nm
Die size	94 mm2	246 mm2
Maximum core temperature	no data	105 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)	65 °C	no data
Number of transistors	no data	4940 Million
64 bit support	+	+
Windows 11 compatibility	-	+

Compatibility

Information on Celeron G1620 and Ryzen 3 3200U 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	FP5
Power consumption (TDP)	55 Watt	15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron G1620 and Ryzen 3 3200U. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensions	Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2	MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, BMI2, ABM, FMA, ADX, SMEP, SMAP, SMT, CPB, AES-NI, RDRAND, RDSEED, SHA, SME
AES-NI	-	+
FMA	-	+
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	+	-

Security technologies

Celeron G1620 and Ryzen 3 3200U 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 Ryzen 3 3200U 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 Ryzen 3 3200U. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory types	DDR3	DDR4
Maximum memory size	32 GB	64 GB
Max memory channels	2	2
Maximum memory bandwidth	21 GB/s	38.397 GB/s
ECC memory support	+	+

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card Compare	Intel HD Graphics for 3rd Generation Intel Processors	AMD Radeon RX Vega 3 ( - 1200 MHz)
Graphics max frequency	1.05 GHz	no data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron G1620 and Ryzen 3 3200U integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported

3

no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron G1620 and Ryzen 3 3200U.

PCIe version	2.0	3.0
PCI Express lanes	no data	12

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.

---

Pros & cons summary

---

Performance score	0.99	2.38
Integrated graphics card	0.77	2.98
Recency	3 December 2012	6 January 2019
Threads	2	4
Chip lithography	22 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	55 Watt	15 Watt

---

Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron G1620 and Ryzen 3 3200U, 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.

---