Celeron M 310 vs EPYC 8124P

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking331not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation29.98no data
Market segmentServerLaptop
Seriesno dataCeleron M
Power efficiency17.54no data
DesignerAMDIntel
ManufacturerTSMCno data
Architecture codenameSiena (2023−2024)Banias (2003)
Release date18 September 2023 (2 years ago)no data
Launch price (MSRP)$639no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

Detailed specifications

EPYC 8124P and Celeron M 310 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 cores16 (Hexadeca-Core)1 (Single-Core)
Threads321
Base clock speed2.45 GHz1.2 GHz
Boost clock speed3 GHz1.2 GHz
Bus rateno data400 MHz
L1 cache64 KB (per core)no data
L2 cache1 MB (per core)no data
L3 cache64 MB (shared)512 KB L2
Chip lithography5 nm130 nm
Die size2x 73 mm2no data
Maximum core temperatureno data100 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)75 °Cno data
Number of transistors17,750 millionno data
64 bit support+-
Windows 11 compatibilityno data-
VID voltage rangeno data1.356V

Compatibility

Information on EPYC 8124P and Celeron M 310 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 configuration1no data
SocketSP6H-PBGA479, PPGA478
Power consumption (TDP)125 Watt24.5 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 8124P and Celeron M 310. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI+-
AVX+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data-
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data-
Demand Based Switchingno data-
PAEno data32 Bit
FSB parityno data-
Precision Boost 2+no data

Security technologies

EPYC 8124P and Celeron M 310 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
EDBno data-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by EPYC 8124P and Celeron M 310 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-xno data-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by EPYC 8124P and Celeron M 310. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR5no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardN/Ano data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by EPYC 8124P and Celeron M 310.

PCIe version5.0no data
PCI Express lanes96no data

Pros & cons summary


Physical cores 16 1
Threads 32 1
Chip lithography 5 nm 130 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 125 Watt 24 Watt

EPYC 8124P has 1500% more physical cores and 3100% more threads, and a 2500% more advanced lithography process.

Celeron M 310, on the other hand, has 420.8% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between AMD EPYC 8124P and Intel Celeron M 310. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that EPYC 8124P is a server/workstation processor while Celeron M 310 is a notebook one.

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 8124P
EPYC 8124P
Intel Celeron M 310
Celeron M 310

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.


No user ratings yet.

Rate EPYC 8124P on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 7 votes

Rate Celeron M 310 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about processors EPYC 8124P and Celeron M 310, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report bugs or inaccuracies on the site.