Ryzen 7 3700X vs Celeron M 410

Aggregate performance score

Celeron M 410
1 core / 1 thread, 27 Watt
0.08
Ryzen 7 3700X
2019
8 cores / 16 threads, 65 Watt
14.19
+17638%

Ryzen 7 3700X outperforms Celeron M 410 by a whopping 17638% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron M 410 and Ryzen 7 3700X processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking3385508
Place by popularitynot in top-10073
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data18.56
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesCeleron MAMD Ryzen 7
Power efficiency0.2820.66
Architecture codenameYonah (2005−2006)Matisse (Zen 2) (2019−2020)
Release dateno data (2024 years ago)27 May 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$329

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron M 410 and Ryzen 7 3700X 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 cores1 (Single-Core)8 (Octa-Core)
Threads116
Base clock speed1.46 GHz3.6 GHz
Boost clock speed1.46 GHz4.4 GHz
Bus rate533 MHzno data
L1 cacheno data512 KB
L2 cacheno data4 MB
L3 cache1 MB L2 KB32 MB
Chip lithography65 nm7 nm, 12 nm
Maximum core temperature100 °Cno data
Number of transistorsno data19,200 million
64 bit support-+
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplier-+
VID voltage range1.0V-1.3Vno data

Compatibility

Information on Celeron M 410 and Ryzen 7 3700X 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 configurationno data1 (Uniprocessor)
SocketPPGA478AM4
Power consumption (TDP)27 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M 410 and Ryzen 7 3700X. 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
PAE32 Bitno data
FSB parity-no data
Precision Boost 2no data+

Security technologies

Celeron M 410 and Ryzen 7 3700X 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 410 and Ryzen 7 3700X are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
VT-x-no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron M 410 and Ryzen 7 3700X. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR4 Dual-channel
Maximum memory sizeno data128 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
Maximum memory bandwidthno data51.196 GB/s

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 M 410 0.08
Ryzen 7 3700X 14.19
+17638%

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 M 410 123
Ryzen 7 3700X 22537
+18223%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.08 14.19
Physical cores 1 8
Threads 1 16
Chip lithography 65 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 27 Watt 65 Watt

Celeron M 410 has 140.7% lower power consumption.

Ryzen 7 3700X, on the other hand, has a 17637.5% higher aggregate performance score, 700% more physical cores and 1500% more threads, and a 828.6% more advanced lithography process.

The Ryzen 7 3700X is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron M 410 in performance tests.

Be aware that Celeron M 410 is a notebook processor while Ryzen 7 3700X is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M 410 and Ryzen 7 3700X, 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 M 410
Celeron M 410
AMD Ryzen 7 3700X
Ryzen 7 3700X

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.


No user ratings yet.

Rate Celeron M 410 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.4 5342 votes

Rate Ryzen 7 3700X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron M 410 or Ryzen 7 3700X, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.