Celeron 4305UE vs EPYC 7H12
Aggregate performance score
EPYC 7H12 outperforms Celeron 4305UE by a whopping 4011% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 88 | 2711 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 0.96 |
| Market segment | Server | Laptop |
| Series | AMD EPYC | no data |
| Power efficiency | 5.99 | 2.72 |
| Designer | AMD | Intel |
| Manufacturer | TSMC | Intel |
| Architecture codename | Zen 2 (2017−2020) | Whiskey Lake-U (2018−2019) |
| Release date | 18 September 2019 (6 years ago) | 1 October 2018 (7 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $107 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
EPYC 7H12 and Celeron 4305UE 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 | 64 (Tetrahexaconta-Core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 128 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | 2.6 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 3.3 GHz | 2 GHz |
| Multiplier | 26 | no data |
| L1 cache | 96K (per core) | 64 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 512K (per core) | 256 KB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 256 MB (shared) | 2 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm, 14 nm | 10 nm |
| Die size | 192 mm2 | no data |
| Number of transistors | 4,800 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | + | + |
| Unlocked multiplier | + | - |
Compatibility
Information on EPYC 7H12 and Celeron 4305UE 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 | 2 (Multiprocessor) | 1 |
| Socket | TR4 | Intel BGA 1528 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 280 Watt | 15 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 7H12 and Celeron 4305UE. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Precision Boost 2 | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by EPYC 7H12 and Celeron 4305UE 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 EPYC 7H12 and Celeron 4305UE. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 Eight-channel | DDR4 |
| Maximum memory size | 4 TiB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 8 | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 204.763 GB/s | no data |
| ECC memory support | + | - |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | Intel UHD Graphics 610 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by EPYC 7H12 and Celeron 4305UE.
| PCIe version | no data | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 16 |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
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. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 39.47 | 0.96 |
| Recency | 18 September 2019 | 1 October 2018 |
| Physical cores | 64 | 2 |
| Threads | 128 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 280 Watt | 15 Watt |
EPYC 7H12 has a 4011.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 months, 3100% more physical cores and 6300% more threads, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.
Celeron 4305UE, on the other hand, has 1766.7% lower power consumption.
The AMD EPYC 7H12 is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Celeron 4305UE in performance tests.
Be aware that EPYC 7H12 is a server/workstation processor while Celeron 4305UE is a notebook one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
