Celeron M 410 vs Ryzen 3 2200G
Primary details
Comparing Ryzen 3 2200G and Celeron M 410 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 1284 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | 71 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 8.79 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | AMD Ryzen 3 | Celeron M |
| Architecture codename | Raven Ridge (2017−2018) | Yonah (2005−2006) |
| Release date | 12 February 2018 (6 years ago) | no data |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $99 | no data |
| Current price | $88 (0.9x MSRP) | $62 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Ryzen 3 2200G and Celeron M 410 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 | 4 (Quad-Core) | 1 (Single-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 1 |
| Base clock speed | 3.5 GHz | 1.46 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.7 GHz | 1.46 GHz |
| Bus support | no data | 533 MHz |
| L1 cache | 128K (per core) | no data |
| L2 cache | 512K (per core) | no data |
| L3 cache | 4 MB (shared) | 1 MB L2 KB |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 65 nm |
| Die size | 210 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 100 °C |
| Number of transistors | 4,950 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | - |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | Yes | No |
| VID voltage range | no data | 1.0V-1.3V |
Compatibility
Information on Ryzen 3 2200G and Celeron M 410 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 (Uniprocessor) | no data |
| Socket | AM4 | PPGA478 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 27 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 3 2200G and Celeron M 410. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | XFR, FMA3, SSE 4.2, AVX2, SMT | no data |
| AES-NI | + | no data |
| FMA | + | no data |
| AVX | + | no data |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | - |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | - |
| Idle States | no data | - |
| Demand Based Switching | no data | - |
| PAE | no data | 32 Bit |
| FSB parity | no data | - |
| Status | no data | Discontinued |
Security technologies
Ryzen 3 2200G and Celeron M 410 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | - |
| EDB | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 3 2200G and Celeron M 410 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | no data |
| VT-x | no data | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 3 2200G and Celeron M 410. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 Dual-channel | no data |
| Maximum memory size | 64 GB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 2 | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 46.933 GB/s | no data |
| ECC memory support | + | - |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | AMD Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 3 2200G and Celeron M 410.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | no data |
| PCI Express lanes | 12 | no 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.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 68%
Ryzen 3 2200G outperforms Celeron M 410 by 5398% in Passmark.
Pros & cons summary
| Physical cores | 4 | 1 |
| Threads | 4 | 1 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 65 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 27 Watt |
We couldn't decide between Ryzen 3 2200G and Celeron M 410. We've got no test results to judge.
Note that Ryzen 3 2200G is a desktop processor while Celeron M 410 is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 3 2200G and Celeron M 410, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
