Ryzen 7 5700X vs Celeron M 560

VS

Primary details

Comparing Celeron M 560 and Ryzen 7 5700X processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the rankingnot rated383
Place by popularitynot in top-10023
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data40.80
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesIntel Celeron Mno data
Power efficiencyno data24.44
Architecture codenameMerom (2006−2008)Vermeer (Zen 3) (2020−2022)
Release date1 May 2008 (16 years ago)4 April 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$299

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron M 560 and Ryzen 7 5700X 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 speedno data3.4 GHz
Boost clock speed2.13 GHz4.6 GHz
Bus rate533 MHzno data
L1 cache64 KB64K (per core)
L2 cache1 MB512K (per core)
L3 cacheno data32 MB (shared)
Chip lithography65 nm7 nm
Die size143 mm281 mm2
Maximum core temperature100 °C90 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data95 °C
Number of transistors291 Million4,150 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplier-+

Compatibility

Information on Celeron M 560 and Ryzen 7 5700X 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
SocketPPGA478AM4
Power consumption (TDP)30 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M 560 and Ryzen 7 5700X. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno data86x MMX(+), SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, SSE4A,-64, AMD-V, AES, AVX, AVX2, FMA3, SHA, Precision Boost 2
AES-NI-+
AVX-+
Precision Boost 2no data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron M 560 and Ryzen 7 5700X are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron M 560 and Ryzen 7 5700X. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR4-3200

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron M 560 and Ryzen 7 5700X.

PCIe versionno data4.0
PCI Express lanesno data20

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.



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 560 535
Ryzen 7 5700X 26658
+4883%

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

Celeron M 560 2008
Ryzen 7 5700X 6527
+225%

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

Celeron M 560 2008
Ryzen 7 5700X 42876
+2035%

Pros & cons summary


Recency 1 May 2008 4 April 2022
Physical cores 1 8
Threads 1 16
Chip lithography 65 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 30 Watt 65 Watt

Celeron M 560 has 116.7% lower power consumption.

Ryzen 7 5700X, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 13 years, 700% more physical cores and 1500% more threads, and a 828.6% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Celeron M 560 and Ryzen 7 5700X. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Celeron M 560 is a notebook processor while Ryzen 7 5700X is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M 560 and Ryzen 7 5700X, 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 560
Celeron M 560
AMD Ryzen 7 5700X
Ryzen 7 5700X

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.


2.7 43 votes

Rate Celeron M 560 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.5 6898 votes

Rate Ryzen 7 5700X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron M 560 or Ryzen 7 5700X, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.