EPYC 9355 vs Celeron M 420

Primary details

Comparing Celeron M 420 and EPYC 9355 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking3378not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopServer
SeriesCeleron Mno data
Power efficiency0.32no data
Architecture codenameYonah (2005−2006)Turin (2024)
Release dateno data (2024 years ago)10 October 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$3,694

Detailed specifications

Celeron M 420 and EPYC 9355 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)32 (Dotriaconta-Core)
Threads164
Base clock speed1.6 GHz3.55 GHz
Boost clock speed1.6 GHz4.4 GHz
Bus rate533 MHzno data
L1 cacheno data80 KB (per core)
L2 cacheno data1 MB (per core)
L3 cache1 MB L2 KB256 MB (shared)
Chip lithography65 nm4 nm
Die sizeno data8x 70.6 mm2
Maximum core temperature100 °Cno data
Number of transistorsno data66,520 million
64 bit support-+
Windows 11 compatibility-no data
VID voltage range1.0V-1.3Vno data

Compatibility

Information on Celeron M 420 and EPYC 9355 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 data2
SocketPPGA478SP5
Power consumption (TDP)27 Watt280 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M 420 and EPYC 9355. 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
FSB parity-no data
Precision Boost 2no data+

Security technologies

Celeron M 420 and EPYC 9355 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 420 and EPYC 9355 are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
VT-x-no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron M 420 and EPYC 9355. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR5

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataN/A

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron M 420 and EPYC 9355.

PCIe versionno data5.0
PCI Express lanesno data128

Pros & cons summary


Physical cores 1 32
Threads 1 64
Chip lithography 65 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 27 Watt 280 Watt

Celeron M 420 has 937% lower power consumption.

EPYC 9355, on the other hand, has 3100% more physical cores and 6300% more threads, and a 1525% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Celeron M 420 and EPYC 9355. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Celeron M 420 is a notebook processor while EPYC 9355 is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M 420 and EPYC 9355, 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 420
Celeron M 420
AMD EPYC 9355
EPYC 9355

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.


4.2 81 vote

Rate Celeron M 420 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate EPYC 9355 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron M 420 or EPYC 9355, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.