Ryzen 9 7900X vs Celeron M 360
Aggregate performance score
Ryzen 9 7900X outperforms Celeron M 360 by a whopping 22400% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 3554 | 177 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | Celeron M | no data |
| Power efficiency | 0.26 | 7.27 |
| Designer | Intel | AMD |
| Manufacturer | no data | TSMC |
| Architecture codename | Dothan (2004−2005) | Raphael (Zen4) (2022−2023) |
| Release date | no data | 27 September 2022 (2 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Celeron M 360 and Ryzen 9 7900X 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) | 12 (Dodeca-Core) |
| Threads | 1 | 24 |
| Base clock speed | 1.4 GHz | 4.7 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.4 GHz | 5.6 GHz |
| Bus rate | 400 MHz | no data |
| L1 cache | no data | 64K (per core) |
| L2 cache | no data | 1 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 1 MB L2 KB | 64 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 90 nm | 5 nm |
| Die size | no data | 2x 70 (CCD) mm2 + 122 (I/O) mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | 95 °C |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 47 °C |
| Number of transistors | no data | CCD: 6,5 Mrd + IOD: 3,4 Mrd Million |
| 64 bit support | - | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
| Unlocked multiplier | - | + |
| VID voltage range | 1.26V, 1.004V-1.292V | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron M 360 and Ryzen 9 7900X 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 |
| Socket | PPGA478, H-PBGA479 | AM5 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 21 Watt | 170 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M 360 and Ryzen 9 7900X. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | 5 nm (CCD), 6 nm (I/O) nm, 0.650 - 1.475V |
| 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 360 and Ryzen 9 7900X 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 360 and Ryzen 9 7900X are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
| VT-x | - | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron M 360 and Ryzen 9 7900X. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR5-5200 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | AMD Radeon Graphics (Ryzen 7000) |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron M 360 and Ryzen 9 7900X.
| PCIe version | no data | 5.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 24 |
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.
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. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.
wPrime 32
wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.13 | 29.25 |
| Physical cores | 1 | 12 |
| Threads | 1 | 24 |
| Chip lithography | 90 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 21 Watt | 170 Watt |
Celeron M 360 has 709.5% lower power consumption.
Ryzen 9 7900X, on the other hand, has a 22400% higher aggregate performance score, 1100% more physical cores and 2300% more threads, and a 1700% more advanced lithography process.
The AMD Ryzen 9 7900X is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Celeron M 360 in performance tests.
Be aware that Celeron M 360 is a notebook processor while Ryzen 9 7900X 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.
