EPYC 9654 vs Celeron J4005

VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron J4005
2017
2 cores / 2 threads, 10 Watt
0.98
EPYC 9654
2022
96 cores / 192 threads, 360 Watt
75.73
+7628%

EPYC 9654 outperforms Celeron J4005 by a whopping 7628% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron J4005 and EPYC 9654 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking24756
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.041.29
Market segmentDesktop processorServer
SeriesIntel CeleronAMD EPYC
Power efficiency9.2719.91
Architecture codenameGoldmont Plus (2017)Genoa (2022−2023)
Release date11 December 2017 (6 years ago)10 November 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$107$11,805

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

EPYC 9654 has 24% better value for money than Celeron J4005.

Detailed specifications

Celeron J4005 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 GHz2.4 GHz
Boost clock speed2.7 GHz3.7 GHz
Multiplier2024
L1 cache56 KB (per core)64K (per core)
L2 cache4 MB (shared)1 MB (per core)
L3 cache4 MB384 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm5 nm, 6 nm
Die size93 mm212x 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 J4005 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 configuration1 (Uniprocessor)2
SocketFCBGA1090SP5
Power consumption (TDP)10 Watt360 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron J4005 and EPYC 9654. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.2no data
AES-NI++
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Speed Shift-no data
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Smart Response-no data
GPIO+no data
Turbo Boost Max 3.0-no data
Precision Boost 2no data+

Security technologies

Celeron J4005 and EPYC 9654 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

EDB+no data
Secure Key+no data
MPX+-
Identity Protection+-
SGXYes with Intel® MEno data
OS Guard+no data
Anti-Theft-no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron J4005 and EPYC 9654 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 J4005 and EPYC 9654. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4DDR5-4800
Maximum memory size8 GB6 TiB
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidth38.397 GB/s460.8 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel UHD Graphics 600no data
Max video memory8 GBno data
Quick Sync Video+-
Graphics max frequency700 MHzno data
Execution Units12no data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron J4005 and EPYC 9654 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported3no data
eDP+no data
DisplayPort+-
HDMI+-
MIPI-DSI+no data

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by Celeron J4005 and EPYC 9654 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

4K resolution support+no data

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Celeron J4005 and EPYC 9654 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectX12no data
OpenGL4.4no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron J4005 and EPYC 9654.

PCIe version2.05.0
PCI Express lanes6128
USB revision2.0/3.0no data
Total number of SATA ports2no data
Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Ports2no data
Number of USB ports8no data
Integrated LAN-no data
UART+no 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 J4005 0.98
EPYC 9654 75.73
+7628%

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 J4005 1553
EPYC 9654 120295
+7646%

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 J4005 343
EPYC 9654 1837
+436%

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 J4005 578
EPYC 9654 18836
+3159%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.98 75.73
Recency 11 December 2017 10 November 2022
Physical cores 2 96
Threads 2 192
Chip lithography 14 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 10 Watt 360 Watt

Celeron J4005 has 3500% lower power consumption.

EPYC 9654, on the other hand, has a 7627.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, 4700% more physical cores and 9500% more threads, and a 180% more advanced lithography process.

The EPYC 9654 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron J4005 in performance tests.

Note that Celeron J4005 is a desktop processor while EPYC 9654 is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron J4005 and EPYC 9654, 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 J4005
Celeron J4005
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.

Community ratings

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


3.1 165 votes

Rate Celeron J4005 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 995 votes

Rate EPYC 9654 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron J4005 or EPYC 9654, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.