EPYC 7H12 vs Celeron J1850

#ad
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregated performance score

Celeron J1850
2013
4 cores / 4 threads
0.61

EPYC 7H12 outperforms Celeron J1850 by a whopping 7280% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron J1850 and EPYC 7H12 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking266437
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data22.20
Market segmentLaptopServer
SeriesIntel CeleronAMD EPYC
Architecture codenameBay Trail-D (2013)Zen 2 (2019−2020)
Release date1 September 2013 (10 years ago)18 September 2019 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$82no data
Current priceno data$1970

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron J1850 and EPYC 7H12 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)64 (Tetrahexaconta-Core)
Threads4128
Base clock speed2 GHz2.6 GHz
Boost clock speed2 GHz3.3 GHz
L1 cache224 KB96K (per core)
L2 cache2 MB512K (per core)
L3 cache2 MB L2 Cache256 MB (shared)
Chip lithography22 nm7 nm, 14 nm
Die sizeno data192 mm2
Maximum core temperature100 °Cno data
Number of transistorsno data4,800 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplierNoYes

Compatibility

Information on Celeron J1850 and EPYC 7H12 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 (Multiprocessor)
SocketFCBGA1170TR4
Power consumption (TDP)10 Watt280 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron J1850 and EPYC 7H12. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI-+
AVXno data+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
SIPP-no data
PAE36 Bitno data
FDI-no data
StatusDiscontinuedno data
RST-no data

Security technologies

Celeron J1850 and EPYC 7H12 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

EDB+no data
Identity Protection-no data
Anti-Theft-no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron J1850 and EPYC 7H12 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 J1850 and EPYC 7H12. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR4 Eight-channel
Maximum memory size8 GB4 TiB
Max memory channels28
Maximum memory bandwidthno data204.763 GB/s
ECC memory support-+

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel® HD Graphics for Intel Atom® Processor Z3700 Seriesno data
Graphics max frequency792 MHzno data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron J1850 and EPYC 7H12 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported2no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron J1850 and EPYC 7H12.

PCIe version2.0no data
PCI Express lanes4no 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 J1850 0.61
EPYC 7H12 45.02
+7280%

EPYC 7H12 outperforms Celeron J1850 by 7280% 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 J1850 942
EPYC 7H12 69633
+7292%

EPYC 7H12 outperforms Celeron J1850 by 7292% in Passmark.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.61 45.02
Recency 1 September 2013 18 September 2019
Physical cores 4 64
Threads 4 128
Chip lithography 22 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 10 Watt 280 Watt

The EPYC 7H12 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron J1850 in performance tests.

Be aware that Celeron J1850 is a notebook processor while EPYC 7H12 is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron J1850 and EPYC 7H12, 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 J1850
Celeron J1850
AMD EPYC 7H12
EPYC 7H12

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 11 votes

Rate Celeron J1850 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 450 votes

Rate EPYC 7H12 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron J1850 or EPYC 7H12, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.