Ryzen 9 9900X vs Celeron M 383
Primary details
Comparing Celeron M 383 and Ryzen 9 9900X processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | 109 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 66.82 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | Celeron M | no data |
| Power efficiency | no data | 27.22 |
| Architecture codename | Dothan (2004−2005) | Granite Ridge (2024) |
| Release date | no data | 15 August 2024 (less than a year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $499 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Celeron M 383 and Ryzen 9 9900X 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 | no data | 4.4 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1 GHz | 5.6 GHz |
| Bus rate | 400 MHz | no data |
| L1 cache | no data | 80 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | no data | 1 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | no data | 64 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 90 nm | 4 nm |
| Die size | no data | 2x 70.6 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 95 °C |
| Number of transistors | no data | 16,630 million |
| 64 bit support | - | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | no data |
| Unlocked multiplier | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron M 383 and Ryzen 9 9900X 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 | no data | AM5 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 5 Watt | 120 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M 383 and Ryzen 9 9900X. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | SMT, AES, AVX, AVX2, AVX512, FMA3, MMX (+), SHA, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, SSE4A |
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| Precision Boost 2 | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron M 383 and Ryzen 9 9900X are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron M 383 and Ryzen 9 9900X. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR5 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | AMD Radeon Graphics |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron M 383 and Ryzen 9 9900X.
| PCIe version | no data | 5.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 24 |
Pros & cons summary
| Physical cores | 1 | 12 |
| Threads | 1 | 24 |
| Chip lithography | 90 nm | 4 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 5 Watt | 120 Watt |
Celeron M 383 has 2300% lower power consumption.
Ryzen 9 9900X, on the other hand, has 1100% more physical cores and 2300% more threads, and a 2150% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Celeron M 383 and Ryzen 9 9900X. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that Celeron M 383 is a notebook processor while Ryzen 9 9900X is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M 383 and Ryzen 9 9900X, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
