EPYC 9655 vs Celeron M 722

Primary details

Comparing Celeron M 722 and EPYC 9655 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the rankingnot ratednot rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopServer
SeriesIntel Celeron Mno data
Architecture codenamePenryn (2008−2011)Turin (2024)
Release date1 October 2008 (16 years ago)10 October 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$11,852

Detailed specifications

Celeron M 722 and EPYC 9655 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)96
Threads1192
Base clock speedno data2.6 GHz
Boost clock speed1.2 GHz4.5 GHz
Bus rate800 MHzno data
L1 cache64 KB80 KB (per core)
L2 cache1 MB1 MB (per core)
L3 cacheno data384 MB (shared)
Chip lithography45 nm4 nm
Die size107 mm212x 70.6 mm2
Number of transistors410 Million99,780 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data

Compatibility

Information on Celeron M 722 and EPYC 9655 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
SocketVGA956SP5
Power consumption (TDP)5.5 Watt400 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M 722 and EPYC 9655. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI-+
AVX-+
Precision Boost 2no data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron M 722 and EPYC 9655 are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron M 722 and EPYC 9655. 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 722 and EPYC 9655.

PCIe versionno data5.0
PCI Express lanesno data128

Pros & cons summary


Recency 1 October 2008 10 October 2024
Physical cores 1 96
Threads 1 192
Chip lithography 45 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 5 Watt 400 Watt

Celeron M 722 has 7900% lower power consumption.

EPYC 9655, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 16 years, 9500% more physical cores and 19100% more threads, and a 1025% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Celeron M 722 and EPYC 9655. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Celeron M 722 is a notebook processor while EPYC 9655 is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M 722 and EPYC 9655, 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 722
Celeron M 722
AMD EPYC 9655
EPYC 9655

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.


1 1 vote

Rate Celeron M 722 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 12 votes

Rate EPYC 9655 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron M 722 or EPYC 9655, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.