Celeron M 575 vs Ryzen 3 1200

VS

Primary details

Comparing Ryzen 3 1200 and Celeron M 575 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking1402not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation4.48no data
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
SeriesAMD Ryzen 3Intel Celeron M
Power efficiency5.88no data
Architecture codenameSummit Ridge (Zen) (2017)Merom (2006−2008)
Release date27 July 2017 (7 years ago)1 June 2008 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$109$86

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Ryzen 3 1200 and Celeron M 575 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)1 (Single-Core)
Threads41
Base clock speed3.1 GHzno data
Boost clock speed3.1 GHz2 GHz
Bus rate4 × 8 GT/s667 MHz
Multiplier31no data
L1 cache384 KBno data
L2 cache2 MB1 MB
L3 cache8 MB (shared)no data
Chip lithography14 nm65 nm
Die size213 mm2143 mm2
Maximum core temperature95 °C100 °C
Number of transistors4800 Million291 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Ryzen 3 1200 and Celeron M 575 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 configuration1 (Uniprocessor)no data
SocketAM4PPGA478
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt31 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 3 1200 and Celeron M 575. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsMMX (+), SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, SSE4A, AES, AVX, AVX2, FMA3, SHAno data
AES-NI+-
AVX+-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 3 1200 and Celeron M 575 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 3 1200 and Celeron M 575. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4no data
Maximum memory size64 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidth42.671 GB/sno data
ECC memory support+-

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 3 1200 and Celeron M 575.

PCIe version3.0no data
PCI Express lanes20no 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.



Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

Ryzen 3 1200 4178
+118%
Celeron M 575 1917

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

Ryzen 3 1200 13961
+628%
Celeron M 575 1917

3DMark06 CPU

3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.

Ryzen 3 1200 5419
+503%
Celeron M 575 898

Pros & cons summary


Recency 27 July 2017 1 June 2008
Physical cores 4 1
Threads 4 1
Chip lithography 14 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 31 Watt

Ryzen 3 1200 has an age advantage of 9 years, 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads, and a 364.3% more advanced lithography process.

Celeron M 575, on the other hand, has 109.7% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Ryzen 3 1200 and Celeron M 575. We've got no test results to judge.

Note that Ryzen 3 1200 is a desktop processor while Celeron M 575 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 3 1200 and Celeron M 575, 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 Ryzen 3 1200
Ryzen 3 1200
Intel Celeron M 575
Celeron M 575

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.


3.9 2781 vote

Rate Ryzen 3 1200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 9 votes

Rate Celeron M 575 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Ryzen 3 1200 or Celeron M 575, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.