Celeron 6305 vs EPYC 8224P
Aggregate performance score
EPYC 8224P outperforms Celeron 6305 by a whopping 2083% 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 | 239 | 2549 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 30.65 | no data |
| Market segment | Server | Laptop |
| Series | no data | Intel Tiger Lake |
| Power efficiency | 17.26 | no data |
| Designer | AMD | Intel |
| Manufacturer | TSMC | no data |
| Architecture codename | Siena (2023−2024) | Tiger Lake-U (2020−2021) |
| Release date | 18 September 2023 (2 years ago) | 1 September 2020 (5 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $855 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
EPYC 8224P and Celeron 6305 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 | 24 (Tetracosa-Core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 48 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | 2.55 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 3 GHz | 1.8 GHz |
| Bus rate | no data | 4 GT/s |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 160 KB |
| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 2.5 MB |
| L3 cache | 64 MB (shared) | 4 MB |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 10 nm SuperFin |
| Die size | 2x 73 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 100 °C |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 75 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 17,750 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | no data | + |
Compatibility
Information on EPYC 8224P and Celeron 6305 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 | 1 |
| Socket | SP6 | FCBGA1449 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 160 Watt | 2.5 MB + 4 MB |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 8224P and Celeron 6305. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2 |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| Speed Shift | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | - |
| Idle States | no data | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | - | + |
| Precision Boost 2 | + | no data |
| Deep Learning Boost | - | + |
Security technologies
EPYC 8224P and Celeron 6305 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | - |
| SGX | no data | - |
| OS Guard | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by EPYC 8224P and Celeron 6305 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
| EPT | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by EPYC 8224P and Celeron 6305. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR5 | DDR4 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 64 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | N/A | Intel UHD Graphics for 11th Gen Intel Processors |
| Quick Sync Video | - | + |
| Clear Video HD | no data | + |
| Graphics max frequency | no data | 1.25 GHz |
| Execution Units | no data | 48 |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of EPYC 8224P and Celeron 6305 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | no data | 4 |
Graphics image quality
Maximum display resolutions supported by EPYC 8224P and Celeron 6305 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.
| Max resolution over HDMI 1.4 | no data | 4096x2304@60Hz |
| Max resolution over eDP | no data | 4096x2304@60Hz |
| Max resolution over DisplayPort | no data | 7680x4320@60Hz |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by EPYC 8224P and Celeron 6305 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | no data | 12.1 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.6 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by EPYC 8224P and Celeron 6305.
| PCIe version | 5.0 | no data |
| PCI Express lanes | 96 | no data |
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 25.76 | 1.18 |
| Recency | 18 September 2023 | 1 September 2020 |
| Physical cores | 24 | 2 |
| Threads | 48 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 160 Watt | 2 Watt |
EPYC 8224P has a 2083.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, 1100% more physical cores and 2300% more threads, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.
Celeron 6305, on the other hand, has 7900% lower power consumption.
The AMD EPYC 8224P is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Celeron 6305 in performance tests.
Be aware that EPYC 8224P is a server/workstation processor while Celeron 6305 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.
