Ryzen 3 8300G vs Celeron ULV 763
Primary details
Comparing Celeron ULV 763 and Ryzen 3 8300G processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | 854 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 32.47 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Power efficiency | no data | 13.12 |
| Architecture codename | no data | Phoenix2 (2024) |
| Release date | 1 January 2011 (13 years ago) | 8 January 2024 (less than a year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $176 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Celeron ULV 763 and Ryzen 3 8300G 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 | no data | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | no data | 8 |
| Base clock speed | 1.4 GHz | 3.4 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 4.9 GHz |
| L1 cache | no data | 64 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | no data | 1 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 1 MB L2 Cache | 8 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 4 nm |
| Die size | no data | 137 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | no data | 20,900 million |
| 64 bit support | - | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron ULV 763 and Ryzen 3 8300G 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 | BGA956 | AM5 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 10 Watt | 65 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron ULV 763 and Ryzen 3 8300G. 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 |
| Precision Boost 2 | no data | + |
Security technologies
Celeron ULV 763 and Ryzen 3 8300G technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | - | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron ULV 763 and Ryzen 3 8300G are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
| VT-x | - | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron ULV 763 and Ryzen 3 8300G. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR5 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | AMD Radeon 740M |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron ULV 763 and Ryzen 3 8300G.
| PCIe version | no data | 4.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 14 |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 1 January 2011 | 8 January 2024 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 4 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 10 Watt | 65 Watt |
Celeron ULV 763 has 550% lower power consumption.
Ryzen 3 8300G, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 13 years, and a 1025% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Celeron ULV 763 and Ryzen 3 8300G. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that Celeron ULV 763 is a notebook processor while Ryzen 3 8300G is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron ULV 763 and Ryzen 3 8300G, 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.
