EPYC 9845 vs Celeron T3100

VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron T3100
2008
35 Watt
0.38
EPYC 9845
2024
160 cores / 320 threads, 390 Watt
87.23
+22855%

EPYC 9845 outperforms Celeron T3100 by a whopping 22855% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron T3100 and EPYC 9845 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking30263
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.56
Market segmentLaptopServer
Power efficiency1.0321.29
Architecture codenameno dataTurin (2024)
Release date1 July 2008 (16 years ago)10 October 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$13,564

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron T3100 and EPYC 9845 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 coresno data160
Threadsno data320
Base clock speed1.9 GHz2.1 GHz
Boost clock speedno data3.7 GHz
L1 cacheno data80 KB (per core)
L2 cacheno data1 MB (per core)
L3 cache1 MB L2 Cache320 MB (shared)
Chip lithography45 nm3 nm
Maximum core temperature105 °Cno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data
VID voltage range1V-1.25Vno data

Compatibility

Information on Celeron T3100 and EPYC 9845 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
SocketBGA479,PGA478SP5
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt390 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron T3100 and EPYC 9845. 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
Demand Based Switching-no data
FSB parity-no data
Precision Boost 2no data+

Security technologies

Celeron T3100 and EPYC 9845 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 T3100 and EPYC 9845 are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
VT-x-no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron T3100 and EPYC 9845. 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 T3100 and EPYC 9845.

PCIe versionno data5.0
PCI Express lanesno data128

Synthetic benchmark performance

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


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

Celeron T3100 0.38
EPYC 9845 87.23
+22855%

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 T3100 610
EPYC 9845 139712
+22804%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.38 87.23
Recency 1 July 2008 10 October 2024
Chip lithography 45 nm 3 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 390 Watt

Celeron T3100 has 1014.3% lower power consumption.

EPYC 9845, on the other hand, has a 22855.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 16 years, and a 1400% more advanced lithography process.

The EPYC 9845 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron T3100 in performance tests.

Be aware that Celeron T3100 is a notebook processor while EPYC 9845 is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron T3100 and EPYC 9845, 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 T3100
Celeron T3100
AMD EPYC 9845
EPYC 9845

Other comparisons

We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


3.7 18 votes

Rate Celeron T3100 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate EPYC 9845 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron T3100 or EPYC 9845, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.