Celeron 560 vs Ryzen 3 3200G

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon

Primary details

Comparing Ryzen 3 3200G and Celeron 560 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking1232not rated
Place by popularity47not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation9.80no data
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
SeriesAMD Ryzen 3no data
Architecture codenamePicasso (2019−2020)no data
Release date7 July 2019 (4 years ago)1 January 2008 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$99no data
Current price$188 (1.9x MSRP)$54

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Ryzen 3 3200G and Celeron 560 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)no data
Threads4no data
Base clock speed3.6 GHz2.13 GHz
Boost clock speed4 GHzno data
L1 cache96 KB (per core)no data
L2 cache512 KB (per core)no data
L3 cache4 MB (shared)1 MB L2 Cache
Chip lithography12 nm65 nm
Die size210 mm2no data
Maximum core temperatureno data100 °C
Number of transistors4,940 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility+-
Unlocked multiplierYesNo
VID voltage rangeno data0.95V-1.3V

Compatibility

Information on Ryzen 3 3200G and Celeron 560 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 3200G and Celeron 560. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI+no data
AVX+no data
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data-
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data-
Demand Based Switchingno data-
FSB parityno data-
Statusno dataDiscontinued

Security technologies

Ryzen 3 3200G and Celeron 560 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
EDBno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 3 3200G and Celeron 560 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+no data
VT-xno data-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 3 3200G and Celeron 560. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4 Dual-channelno data
Maximum memory size64 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidth46.933 GB/sno data
ECC memory support+no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000)no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 3 3200G and Celeron 560.

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.


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 3200G 7134
+2004%
Celeron 560 339

Ryzen 3 3200G outperforms Celeron 560 by 2004% in Passmark.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 42%

Ryzen 3 3200G 1053
+342%
Celeron 560 238

Ryzen 3 3200G outperforms Celeron 560 by 342% in GeekBench 5 Single-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.

Benchmark coverage: 42%

Ryzen 3 3200G 3009
+1191%
Celeron 560 233

Ryzen 3 3200G outperforms Celeron 560 by 1191% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.

Pros & cons summary


Recency 7 July 2019 1 January 2008
Chip lithography 12 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 31 Watt

We couldn't decide between Ryzen 3 3200G and Celeron 560. We've got no test results to judge.

Note that Ryzen 3 3200G is a desktop processor while Celeron 560 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 3 3200G and Celeron 560, 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 3200G
Ryzen 3 3200G
Intel Celeron 560
Celeron 560

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.


4 2892 votes

Rate Ryzen 3 3200G on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 15 votes

Rate Celeron 560 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Ryzen 3 3200G or Celeron 560, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.