Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX vs Celeron M 390
Aggregate performance score
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX outperforms Celeron M 390 by a whopping 11528% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Celeron M 390 and Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 3261 | 261 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Server |
| Series | Celeron M | AMD Ryzen Threadripper |
| Power efficiency | 0.82 | 7.11 |
| Architecture codename | Dothan (2004−2005) | Matisse (2019−2020) |
| Release date | no data | 14 July 2020 (4 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Celeron M 390 and Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX 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 | 1.7 GHz | 4 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.7 GHz | 4.3 GHz |
| Bus rate | 400 MHz | no data |
| Multiplier | no data | 40 |
| L1 cache | no data | 64K (per core) |
| L2 cache | no data | 512K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 1 MB L2 KB | 64 MB |
| Chip lithography | 90 nm | 7 nm, 12 nm |
| Die size | no data | 74 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | no data |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 95 °C |
| Number of transistors | no data | 3,800 million |
| 64 bit support | - | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
| Unlocked multiplier | - | + |
| VID voltage range | 1.004V-1.292V | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron M 390 and Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX 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 | TR4 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 21 Watt | 280 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M 390 and Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX. 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 |
Security technologies
Celeron M 390 and Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX 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 390 and Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
| VT-x | - | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron M 390 and Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR4-3200 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 2 TiB |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 204.8 GB/s |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron M 390 and Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX.
| PCIe version | no data | 4.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 128 |
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.18 | 20.93 |
| Physical cores | 1 | 12 |
| Threads | 1 | 24 |
| Chip lithography | 90 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 21 Watt | 280 Watt |
Celeron M 390 has 1233.3% lower power consumption.
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX, on the other hand, has a 11527.8% higher aggregate performance score, 1100% more physical cores and 2300% more threads, and a 1185.7% more advanced lithography process.
The Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron M 390 in performance tests.
Be aware that Celeron M 390 is a notebook processor while Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX is a server/workstation one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M 390 and Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
