Ryzen Threadripper 2950X vs Celeron M 350
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | 465 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 5.98 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | Celeron M | AMD Ryzen Threadripper |
| Power efficiency | no data | 3.95 |
| Designer | Intel | AMD |
| Manufacturer | no data | GlobalFoundries |
| Architecture codename | Dothan (2004−2005) | ZEN+ (2018−2019) |
| Release date | no data | 13 August 2018 (7 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $899 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
Celeron M 350 and Ryzen Threadripper 2950X 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 | 1 (Single-Core) | 16 (Hexadeca-Core) |
| Threads | 1 | 32 |
| Base clock speed | 1.3 GHz | 3.5 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.3 GHz | 4.4 GHz |
| Bus rate | 400 MHz | 4 × 8 GT/s |
| Multiplier | no data | 35 |
| L1 cache | no data | 96K (per core) |
| L2 cache | no data | 512K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 1 MB L2 KB | 32 MB |
| Chip lithography | 90 nm | 12 nm |
| Die size | no data | 213 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | no data | 19,200 million |
| 64 bit support | - | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
| Unlocked multiplier | - | + |
| VID voltage range | 1.26V | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron M 350 and Ryzen Threadripper 2950X 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 | no data | 1 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | PPGA478, H-PBGA479, H-PBGA478, PPGA479 | Socket TR4 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 21 Watt | 180 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M 350 and Ryzen Threadripper 2950X. 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 |
| Idle States | - | no data |
| Demand Based Switching | - | no data |
| PAE | 32 Bit | no data |
| FSB parity | - | no data |
| Precision Boost 2 | no data | + |
Security technologies
Celeron M 350 and Ryzen Threadripper 2950X technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | - | no data |
| EDB | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron M 350 and Ryzen Threadripper 2950X are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
| VT-x | - | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron M 350 and Ryzen Threadripper 2950X. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR4 Quad-channel |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 2 TiB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 4 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 93.867 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Pros & cons summary
| Physical cores | 1 | 16 |
| Threads | 1 | 32 |
| Chip lithography | 90 nm | 12 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 21 Watt | 180 Watt |
Celeron M 350 has 757.1% lower power consumption.
Ryzen Threadripper 2950X, on the other hand, has 1500% more physical cores and 3100% more threads, and a 650% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Intel Celeron M 350 and AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2950X. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that Celeron M 350 is a notebook processor while Ryzen Threadripper 2950X is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
