Celeron 807UE vs Ryzen 7 2700
Aggregate performance score
Ryzen 7 2700 outperforms Celeron 807UE by a whopping 6243% 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 | 959 | 3573 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 5.75 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | AMD Ryzen 7 | Intel Celeron |
| Power efficiency | 5.79 | 0.59 |
| Designer | AMD | Intel |
| Manufacturer | GlobalFoundries | no data |
| Architecture codename | Zen+ (2018−2019) | Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) |
| Release date | 19 April 2018 (7 years ago) | no data |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $299 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
Ryzen 7 2700 and Celeron 807UE 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 | 8 (Octa-Core) | 1 (Single-Core) |
| Threads | 16 | 1 |
| Base clock speed | 3.2 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 4.1 GHz | 1 GHz |
| Bus type | no data | DMI 2.0 |
| Bus rate | 4 × 8 GT/s | 4 × 5 GT/s |
| Multiplier | 32 | 10 |
| L1 cache | 96K (per core) | 64 KB |
| L2 cache | 512K (per core) | 256 KB |
| L3 cache | 16 MB (shared) | 1.5 MB |
| Chip lithography | 12 nm | 32 nm |
| Die size | 192 mm2 | 131 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 4,800 million | 504 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | + | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | + | - |
Compatibility
Information on Ryzen 7 2700 and Celeron 807UE 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) | 1 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | AM4 | no data |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 10 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 7 2700 and Celeron 807UE. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | SSE4.2, SSE4A, AMD-V, AES, AVX2, FMA3, SHA | no data |
| AES-NI | + | - |
| FMA | - | + |
| AVX | + | - |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Precision Boost 2 | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 7 2700 and Celeron 807UE are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
| VT-x | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 7 2700 and Celeron 807UE. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 Dual-channel | DDR3-1333 |
| Maximum memory size | 64 GB | 4 GB |
| Max memory channels | 2 | 1 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 46.933 GB/s | 10.662 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | + | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | - | Intel HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 7 2700 and Celeron 807UE.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | no data |
| PCI Express lanes | 20 | 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 | 8.88 | 0.14 |
| Physical cores | 8 | 1 |
| Threads | 16 | 1 |
| Chip lithography | 12 nm | 32 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 10 Watt |
Ryzen 7 2700 has a 6242.9% higher aggregate performance score, 700% more physical cores and 1500% more threads, and a 166.7% more advanced lithography process.
Celeron 807UE, on the other hand, has 550% lower power consumption.
The AMD Ryzen 7 2700 is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Celeron 807UE in performance tests.
Note that Ryzen 7 2700 is a desktop processor while Celeron 807UE 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.
