Ryzen 5 1600AF vs Celeron M 900
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 3667 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | Intel Celeron M | no data |
| Power efficiency | 0.08 | no data |
| Designer | Intel | AMD |
| Manufacturer | no data | GlobalFoundries |
| Architecture codename | Penryn (2008−2011) | Zen (2017−2020) |
| Release date | 1 April 2009 (16 years ago) | 11 October 2019 (6 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $70 | no data |
Detailed specifications
Celeron M 900 and Ryzen 5 1600AF 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) | 6 (Hexa-Core) |
| Threads | 1 | 12 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 3.2 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.2 GHz | 3.6 GHz |
| Bus rate | 800 MHz | no data |
| L1 cache | no data | 96K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 512K (per core) |
| L3 cache | no data | 16 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 12 nm |
| Die size | 107 mm2 | 192 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 105 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 410 Million | 4,800 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | no data |
| Unlocked multiplier | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron M 900 and Ryzen 5 1600AF 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 | PGA478 | AM4 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 65 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M 900 and Ryzen 5 1600AF. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| Precision Boost 2 | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron M 900 and Ryzen 5 1600AF are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron M 900 and Ryzen 5 1600AF. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR4 Dual-channel |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron M 900 and Ryzen 5 1600AF.
| PCIe version | no data | 3.0 |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 1 April 2009 | 11 October 2019 |
| Physical cores | 1 | 6 |
| Threads | 1 | 12 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 12 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 65 Watt |
Celeron M 900 has 85.7% lower power consumption.
Ryzen 5 1600AF, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 10 years, 500% more physical cores and 1100% more threads, and a 275% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Intel Celeron M 900 and AMD Ryzen 5 1600AF. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that Celeron M 900 is a notebook processor while Ryzen 5 1600AF is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
