Celeron N6211 vs EPYC 7251

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

EPYC 7251
2017
8 cores / 16 threads, 120 Watt
9.40
+567%
Celeron N6211
2022
2 cores / 2 threads, 6 Watt
1.41

EPYC 7251 outperforms Celeron N6211 by a whopping 567% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing EPYC 7251 and Celeron N6211 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking8062197
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation2.773.33
Market segmentServerDesktop processor
SeriesAMD EPYCElkhart Lake
Power efficiency7.4120.53
Architecture codenameNaples (2017−2018)Elkhart Lake (2022)
Release date29 June 2017 (7 years ago)17 July 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$574$54

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Celeron N6211 has 20% better value for money than EPYC 7251.

Detailed specifications

EPYC 7251 and Celeron N6211 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 cores8 (Octa-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads162
Base clock speed2.1 GHz1.2 GHz
Boost clock speed2.9 GHz3 GHz
Multiplier21no data
L1 cache96K (per core)no data
L2 cache512K (per core)1.5 MB
L3 cache32 MB (shared)no data
Chip lithography14 nm10 nm
Die size192 mm2no data
Maximum core temperatureno data70 °C
Number of transistors4,800 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplier+-

Compatibility

Information on EPYC 7251 and Celeron N6211 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 configuration2 (Multiprocessor)no data
SocketTR4BGA1493
Power consumption (TDP)120 Watt6.5 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 7251 and Celeron N6211. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI++
AVX+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by EPYC 7251 and Celeron N6211 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by EPYC 7251 and Celeron N6211. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4 Eight-channelDDR4
Maximum memory size2 TiBno data
Max memory channels8no data
Maximum memory bandwidth153.652 GB/sno data
ECC memory support+-

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataIntel UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 16 EU)

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by EPYC 7251 and Celeron N6211.

PCIe version3.0no data
PCI Express lanes128no 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.


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.

EPYC 7251 9.40
+567%
Celeron N6211 1.41

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.

EPYC 7251 14935
+565%
Celeron N6211 2245

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 9.40 1.41
Recency 29 June 2017 17 July 2022
Physical cores 8 2
Threads 16 2
Chip lithography 14 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 120 Watt 6 Watt

EPYC 7251 has a 566.7% higher aggregate performance score, and 300% more physical cores and 700% more threads.

Celeron N6211, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 5 years, a 40% more advanced lithography process, and 1900% lower power consumption.

The EPYC 7251 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron N6211 in performance tests.

Be aware that EPYC 7251 is a server/workstation processor while Celeron N6211 is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between EPYC 7251 and Celeron N6211, 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.


AMD EPYC 7251
EPYC 7251
Intel Celeron N6211
Celeron N6211

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.


1.2 121 vote

Rate EPYC 7251 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.3 4 votes

Rate Celeron N6211 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about EPYC 7251 or Celeron N6211, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.