EPYC 9654P vs Celeron J1800

VS

Primary details

Comparing Celeron J1800 and EPYC 9654P processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the rankingnot rated6
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data1.96
Market segmentLaptopServer
SeriesIntel CeleronAMD EPYC
Power efficiencyno data18.86
Architecture codenameBay Trail-D (2013)Genoa (2022−2023)
Release date1 November 2013 (11 years ago)10 November 2022 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$72$10,625

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron J1800 and EPYC 9654P 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 speed2.41 GHz2.4 GHz
Boost clock speed2.58 GHz2.4 GHz
Multiplierno data24
L1 cache112 KB6 MB
L2 cache1 MB96 MB
L3 cache1 MB L2 Cache384 MB (shared)
Chip lithography22 nm5 nm, 6 nm
Die sizeno data12x 72 mm2
Maximum core temperature105 °Cno data
Number of transistorsno data78,840 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data

Compatibility

Information on Celeron J1800 and EPYC 9654P 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
SocketFCBGA1170SP5
Power consumption (TDP)10 Watt360 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron J1800 and EPYC 9654P. 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
PAE36 Bitno data
FDI-no data
RST-no data
Precision Boost 2no data+

Security technologies

Celeron J1800 and EPYC 9654P technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

EDB+no data
Anti-Theft-no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron J1800 and EPYC 9654P 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 J1800 and EPYC 9654P. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR5-4800
Maximum memory size8 GB6 TiB
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidthno data460.8 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel® HD Graphics for Intel Atom® Processor Z3700 Seriesno data
Quick Sync Video+-
Graphics max frequency792 MHzno data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron J1800 and EPYC 9654P integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported2no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron J1800 and EPYC 9654P.

PCIe version2.05.0
PCI Express lanes4128

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.



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 J1800 573
EPYC 9654P 113949
+19786%

Pros & cons summary


Recency 1 November 2013 10 November 2022
Physical cores 2 96
Threads 2 192
Chip lithography 22 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 10 Watt 360 Watt

Celeron J1800 has 3500% lower power consumption.

EPYC 9654P, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 9 years, 4700% more physical cores and 9500% more threads, and a 340% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Celeron J1800 and EPYC 9654P. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Celeron J1800 is a notebook processor while EPYC 9654P is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron J1800 and EPYC 9654P, 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 J1800
Celeron J1800
AMD EPYC 9654P
EPYC 9654P

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.


2.8 532 votes

Rate Celeron J1800 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5 9 votes

Rate EPYC 9654P on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron J1800 or EPYC 9654P, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.