Celeron N3050 vs Ryzen 5 1600

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

Comparing Ryzen 5 1600 and Celeron N3050 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking881not rated
Place by popularity51not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation13.38no data
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
SeriesAMD Ryzen 5Intel Celeron
Architecture codenameZen (2017−2020)Braswell (2015−2016)
Release date11 April 2017 (7 years ago)1 April 2015 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$219$107
Current price$115 (0.5x MSRP)$247 (2.3x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Ryzen 5 1600 and Celeron N3050 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 cores6 (Hexa-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads122
Base clock speed3.2 GHz1.6 GHz
Boost clock speed3.6 GHz2.16 GHz
L1 cache96K (per core)no data
L2 cache512K (per core)2 MB
L3 cache16 MB (shared)0 KB
Chip lithography14 nm14 nm
Die size192 mm2no data
Maximum core temperatureno data90 °C
Number of transistors4,800 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplierYesNo

Compatibility

Information on Ryzen 5 1600 and Celeron N3050 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)1
SocketAM4FCBGA1170
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt6 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 5 1600 and Celeron N3050. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsXFR, FMA3, SSE 4.2, AVX2, SMTno data
AES-NI++
AVX+no data
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoringno data+
SIPPno data-
Smart Responseno data-
GPIOno data+
Smart Connectno data-
Statusno dataDiscontinued
HD Audiono data+
RSTno data-

Security technologies

Ryzen 5 1600 and Celeron N3050 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
EDBno data+
Secure Bootno data+
Secure Keyno data+
Identity Protectionno data+
OS Guardno data-
Anti-Theftno data-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 5 1600 and Celeron N3050 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+no data
VT-dno data-
VT-xno data+
VT-ino data-
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 5 1600 and Celeron N3050. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4DDR3
Maximum memory size64 GB8 GB
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidth42.671 GB/sno data
ECC memory support+-

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card-Intel® HD Graphics for Intel® Celeron® Processor N3000 Series
Max video memory-8 GB
Quick Sync Video-+
Clear Video-+
Clear Video HD-+
Graphics max frequency-600 MHz
Execution Units-12
InTru 3D--

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Ryzen 5 1600 and Celeron N3050 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported-3
eDP-+
DisplayPort-+
HDMI-+

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Ryzen 5 1600 and Celeron N3050 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectX-+
OpenGL-+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 5 1600 and Celeron N3050.

PCIe version3.02.0
PCI Express lanes204
USB revisionno data2.0/3.0
Total number of SATA portsno data2
Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Portsno data2
Number of USB portsno data5
Integrated LANno data-
UARTno 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 5 1600 12283
+1993%
Celeron N3050 587

Ryzen 5 1600 outperforms Celeron N3050 by 1993% 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 5 1600 1071
+600%
Celeron N3050 153

Ryzen 5 1600 outperforms Celeron N3050 by 600% 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 5 1600 4586
+1631%
Celeron N3050 265

Ryzen 5 1600 outperforms Celeron N3050 by 1631% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 20%

Ryzen 5 1600 4538
+313%
Celeron N3050 1099

Ryzen 5 1600 outperforms Celeron N3050 by 313% in Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

Ryzen 5 1600 25970
+1158%
Celeron N3050 2064

Ryzen 5 1600 outperforms Celeron N3050 by 1158% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

Ryzen 5 1600 8244
+563%
Celeron N3050 1243

Ryzen 5 1600 outperforms Celeron N3050 by 563% in 3DMark06 CPU.

wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

Benchmark coverage: 18%

Ryzen 5 1600 6.85
+706%
Celeron N3050 55.2

Celeron N3050 outperforms Ryzen 5 1600 by 706% in wPrime 32.

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

Ryzen 5 1600 13
+1491%
Celeron N3050 1

Ryzen 5 1600 outperforms Celeron N3050 by 1491% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core.

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.

Benchmark coverage: 15%

Ryzen 5 1600 1129
+1706%
Celeron N3050 63

Ryzen 5 1600 outperforms Celeron N3050 by 1706% in Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core.

Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R15 (standing for Release 15) is a benchmark made by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version (sometimes called Single-Thread) only uses a single processor thread to render a room full of reflective spheres and light sources.

Benchmark coverage: 15%

Ryzen 5 1600 147
+332%
Celeron N3050 34

Ryzen 5 1600 outperforms Celeron N3050 by 332% in Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core.

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R11.5 is an old benchmark by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version loads a single thread with ray tracing to render a glossy room full of crystal spheres and light sources.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

Ryzen 5 1600 1.65
+302%
Celeron N3050 0.41

Ryzen 5 1600 outperforms Celeron N3050 by 302% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core.

TrueCrypt AES

TrueCrypt is a discontinued piece of software that was widely used for on-the-fly-encryption of disk partitions, now superseded by VeraCrypt. It contains several embedded performance tests, one of them being TrueCrypt AES, which measures data encryption speed using AES algorithm. Result is encryption speed in gigabytes per second.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

Ryzen 5 1600 6.4
+1424%
Celeron N3050 0.4

Ryzen 5 1600 outperforms Celeron N3050 by 1424% in TrueCrypt AES.

WinRAR 4.0

WinRAR 4.0 is an outdated version of a popular file archiver. It contains an internal speed test, using 'Best' setting of RAR compression on large chunks of randomly generated data. Its results are measured in kilobytes per second.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

Ryzen 5 1600 3430
+548%
Celeron N3050 529

Ryzen 5 1600 outperforms Celeron N3050 by 548% in WinRAR 4.0.

x264 encoding pass 2

x264 Pass 2 is a slower variant of x264 video compression that produces a variable bit rate output file, which results in better quality since the higher bit rate is used when it is needed more. Benchmark result is still measured in frames per second.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

Ryzen 5 1600 69
+1349%
Celeron N3050 5

Ryzen 5 1600 outperforms Celeron N3050 by 1349% in x264 encoding pass 2.

x264 encoding pass 1

x264 version 4.0 is a video encoding benchmark uses MPEG 4 x264 compression method to compress a sample HD (720p) video. Pass 1 is a faster variant that produces a constant bit rate output file. Its result is measured in frames per second, which means how many frames of the source video file were encoded per second.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

Ryzen 5 1600 177
+594%
Celeron N3050 26

Ryzen 5 1600 outperforms Celeron N3050 by 594% in x264 encoding pass 1.

Geekbench 3 32-bit multi-core

Benchmark coverage: 5%

Ryzen 5 1600 19391
+1125%
Celeron N3050 1583

Ryzen 5 1600 outperforms Celeron N3050 by 1125% in Geekbench 3 32-bit multi-core.

Geekbench 3 32-bit single-core

Benchmark coverage: 5%

Ryzen 5 1600 3189
+269%
Celeron N3050 865

Ryzen 5 1600 outperforms Celeron N3050 by 269% in Geekbench 3 32-bit single-core.

Geekbench 2

Benchmark coverage: 5%

Ryzen 5 1600 16217
+639%
Celeron N3050 2194

Ryzen 5 1600 outperforms Celeron N3050 by 639% in Geekbench 2.

Pros & cons summary


Recency 11 April 2017 1 April 2015
Physical cores 6 2
Threads 12 2
Cost $219 $107
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 6 Watt

We couldn't decide between Ryzen 5 1600 and Celeron N3050. We've got no test results to judge.

Note that Ryzen 5 1600 is a desktop processor while Celeron N3050 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 5 1600 and Celeron N3050, 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 5 1600
Ryzen 5 1600
Intel Celeron N3050
Celeron N3050

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.


4.1 5516 votes

Rate Ryzen 5 1600 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.6 502 votes

Rate Celeron N3050 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Ryzen 5 1600 or Celeron N3050, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.