Ryzen 7 8700F vs Celeron U3400
Primary details
Comparing Celeron U3400 and Ryzen 7 8700F processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | 285 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 55.20 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | Intel Celeron | no data |
| Power efficiency | no data | 28.42 |
| Architecture codename | Westmere (2010−2011) | Phoenix (2023−2024) |
| Release date | 24 May 2010 (14 years ago) | 1 April 2024 (less than a year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $270 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Celeron U3400 and Ryzen 7 8700F 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 | 2 (Dual-core) | 8 (Octa-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 16 |
| Base clock speed | 1.06 GHz | 4.1 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 0.07 GHz | 5 GHz |
| Bus type | DMI 1.0 | no data |
| Bus rate | 1 × 2.5 GT/s | no data |
| Multiplier | 8 | no data |
| L1 cache | 128 KB | 64 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 512 KB | 1 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 2 MB | 16 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 4 nm |
| Die size | 81 mm2 | 178 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 105 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 382 Million | 25,000 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | no data |
| Unlocked multiplier | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron U3400 and Ryzen 7 8700F 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 | 1 (Uniprocessor) | 1 |
| Socket | BGA1288 | AM5 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 18 Watt | 65 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron U3400 and Ryzen 7 8700F. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | - | + |
| FMA | + | - |
| AVX | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | no data |
| Idle States | + | no data |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | - |
| Flex Memory Access | + | no data |
| PAE | 36 Bit | no data |
| FDI | + | no data |
| Fast Memory Access | + | no data |
| Precision Boost 2 | no data | + |
Security technologies
Celeron U3400 and Ryzen 7 8700F 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 U3400 and Ryzen 7 8700F are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
| VT-d | - | no data |
| VT-x | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron U3400 and Ryzen 7 8700F. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3-800 | DDR5 |
| Maximum memory size | 8 GB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 2 | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 12.799 GB/s | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Intel® HD Graphics for Previous Generation Intel® Processors | N/A |
| Clear Video | + | no data |
| Graphics max frequency | 500 MHz | no data |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Celeron U3400 and Ryzen 7 8700F integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | 2 | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron U3400 and Ryzen 7 8700F.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | 4.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 16 | 20 |
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 24 May 2010 | 1 April 2024 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 8 |
| Threads | 2 | 16 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 4 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 18 Watt | 65 Watt |
Celeron U3400 has 261.1% lower power consumption.
Ryzen 7 8700F, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 13 years, 300% more physical cores and 700% more threads, and a 700% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Celeron U3400 and Ryzen 7 8700F. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that Celeron U3400 is a notebook processor while Ryzen 7 8700F is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron U3400 and Ryzen 7 8700F, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
