Ryzen 9 5900HX vs Celeron N3050

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

Comparing Celeron N3050 and Ryzen 9 5900HX processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance rankingnot rated464
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel CeleronAMD Cezanne (Zen 3, Ryzen 5000)
Architecture codenameBraswell (2015−2016)Cezanne-H (Zen 3)
Release date1 April 2015 (9 years ago)7 January 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$107no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron N3050 and Ryzen 9 5900HX 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 cores2 (Dual-core)8 (Octa-Core)
Threads216
Base clock speed1.6 GHz3.3 GHz
Boost clock speed2.16 GHz4.6 GHz
L1 cacheno data512 KB
L2 cache2 MB4 MB
L3 cache0 KB16 MB
Chip lithography14 nm7 nm
Die sizeno data180 mm2
Maximum core temperature90 °C105 °C
Number of transistorsno data9,800 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplierNoNo

Compatibility

Information on Celeron N3050 and Ryzen 9 5900HX 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 configuration1 (Uniprocessor)1
SocketFCBGA1170FP6
Power consumption (TDP)6 Watt45 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron N3050 and Ryzen 9 5900HX. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataDDR4-3200/LPDDR4-4266 RAM, PCIe 3, MMX (+), SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, SSE4A, AES, AVX, AVX2, FMA3, SHA
AES-NI++
AVXno data+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron N3050 and Ryzen 9 5900HX are enumerated here.

AMD-Vno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron N3050 and Ryzen 9 5900HX. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR4
Maximum memory size8 GBno data
ECC memory support-no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Intel HD Graphics (Braswell)AMD Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000)

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron N3050 and Ryzen 9 5900HX.

PCIe version2.03.0
PCI Express lanes4no data

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.

Benchmark coverage: 68%

Celeron N3050 587
Ryzen 9 5900HX 22564
+3744%

Ryzen 9 5900HX outperforms Celeron N3050 by 3744% in Passmark.

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

Benchmark coverage: 42%

Celeron N3050 153
Ryzen 9 5900HX 1840
+1103%

Ryzen 9 5900HX outperforms Celeron N3050 by 1103% in GeekBench 5 Single-Core.

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

Benchmark coverage: 42%

Celeron N3050 265
Ryzen 9 5900HX 7515
+2736%

Ryzen 9 5900HX outperforms Celeron N3050 by 2736% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 20%

Celeron N3050 1099
Ryzen 9 5900HX 6409
+483%

Ryzen 9 5900HX outperforms Celeron N3050 by 483% in Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

Celeron N3050 2064
Ryzen 9 5900HX 40114
+1844%

Ryzen 9 5900HX outperforms Celeron N3050 by 1844% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.

3DMark06 CPU

3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

Celeron N3050 1243
Ryzen 9 5900HX 14254
+1047%

Ryzen 9 5900HX outperforms Celeron N3050 by 1047% in 3DMark06 CPU.

wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

Benchmark coverage: 18%

Celeron N3050 55.2
Ryzen 9 5900HX 3.46
+1495%

Celeron N3050 outperforms Ryzen 9 5900HX by 1495% in wPrime 32.

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

Celeron N3050 1
Ryzen 9 5900HX 25
+3028%

Ryzen 9 5900HX outperforms Celeron N3050 by 3028% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core.

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.

Benchmark coverage: 15%

Celeron N3050 63
Ryzen 9 5900HX 2106
+3270%

Ryzen 9 5900HX outperforms Celeron N3050 by 3270% in Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core.

Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R15 (standing for Release 15) is a benchmark made by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version (sometimes called Single-Thread) only uses a single processor thread to render a room full of reflective spheres and light sources.

Benchmark coverage: 15%

Celeron N3050 34
Ryzen 9 5900HX 240
+606%

Ryzen 9 5900HX outperforms Celeron N3050 by 606% in Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core.

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R11.5 is an old benchmark by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version loads a single thread with ray tracing to render a glossy room full of crystal spheres and light sources.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

Celeron N3050 0.41
Ryzen 9 5900HX 2.84
+593%

Ryzen 9 5900HX outperforms Celeron N3050 by 593% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core.

TrueCrypt AES

TrueCrypt is a discontinued piece of software that was widely used for on-the-fly-encryption of disk partitions, now superseded by VeraCrypt. It contains several embedded performance tests, one of them being TrueCrypt AES, which measures data encryption speed using AES algorithm. Result is encryption speed in gigabytes per second.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

Celeron N3050 0.4
Ryzen 9 5900HX 11.1
+2543%

Ryzen 9 5900HX outperforms Celeron N3050 by 2543% in TrueCrypt AES.

WinRAR 4.0

WinRAR 4.0 is an outdated version of a popular file archiver. It contains an internal speed test, using 'Best' setting of RAR compression on large chunks of randomly generated data. Its results are measured in kilobytes per second.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

Celeron N3050 529
Ryzen 9 5900HX 7061
+1235%

Ryzen 9 5900HX outperforms Celeron N3050 by 1235% in WinRAR 4.0.

x264 encoding pass 2

x264 Pass 2 is a slower variant of x264 video compression that produces a variable bit rate output file, which results in better quality since the higher bit rate is used when it is needed more. Benchmark result is still measured in frames per second.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

Celeron N3050 5
Ryzen 9 5900HX 120
+2436%

Ryzen 9 5900HX outperforms Celeron N3050 by 2436% in x264 encoding pass 2.

x264 encoding pass 1

x264 version 4.0 is a video encoding benchmark uses MPEG 4 x264 compression method to compress a sample HD (720p) video. Pass 1 is a faster variant that produces a constant bit rate output file. Its result is measured in frames per second, which means how many frames of the source video file were encoded per second.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

Celeron N3050 26
Ryzen 9 5900HX 275
+979%

Ryzen 9 5900HX outperforms Celeron N3050 by 979% in x264 encoding pass 1.

Pros & cons summary


Integrated graphics card 0.62 9.11
Recency 1 April 2015 7 January 2021
Physical cores 2 8
Threads 2 16
Chip lithography 14 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 6 Watt 45 Watt

Celeron N3050 has 650% lower power consumption.

Ryzen 9 5900HX, on the other hand, has 1369.4% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 5 years, 300% more physical cores and 700% more threads, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Celeron N3050 and Ryzen 9 5900HX. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron N3050 and Ryzen 9 5900HX, 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 N3050
Celeron N3050
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
Ryzen 9 5900HX

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.


2.6 506 votes

Rate Celeron N3050 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.5 970 votes

Rate Ryzen 9 5900HX on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron N3050 or Ryzen 9 5900HX, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.