Celeron N2820 vs Ryzen 7 PRO 2700X
Primary details
Comparing Ryzen 7 PRO 2700X and Celeron N2820 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 666 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 4.38 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | AMD Ryzen 7 | Intel Celeron |
| Architecture codename | Zen+ (2018−2020) | Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) |
| Release date | 19 September 2018 (5 years ago) | 1 December 2013 (10 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $107 |
| Current price | $999 | $215 (2x MSRP) |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Ryzen 7 PRO 2700X and Celeron N2820 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) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 16 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | 3.6 GHz | 2.13 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4.1 GHz | 2.39 GHz |
| Bus support | 4 × 8 GT/s | no data |
| L1 cache | 96K (per core) | 56K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 512K (per core) | 512K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 16 MB (shared) | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 12 nm | 22 nm |
| Die size | 192 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 105 °C |
| Number of transistors | 4,800 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | + | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | Yes | No |
Compatibility
Information on Ryzen 7 PRO 2700X and Celeron N2820 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 |
| Socket | Socket AM4 | FCBGA1170 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 105 Watt | 7.5 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 7 PRO 2700X and Celeron N2820. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | - |
| AVX | + | no data |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | - |
| Idle States | no data | + |
| Smart Connect | no data | + |
| Status | no data | Discontinued |
| RST | no data | - |
Security technologies
Ryzen 7 PRO 2700X and Celeron N2820 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| EDB | no data | + |
| Identity Protection | no data | - |
| Anti-Theft | no data | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 7 PRO 2700X and Celeron N2820 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | no data |
| VT-d | no data | - |
| VT-x | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 7 PRO 2700X and Celeron N2820. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 Dual-channel | DDR3 |
| Maximum memory size | 64 GB | 8 GB |
| Max memory channels | 2 | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 46.933 GB/s | no data |
| ECC memory support | + | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | - | Intel® HD Graphics for Intel Atom® Processor Z3700 Series |
| Quick Sync Video | - | - |
| Clear Video HD | - | - |
| Graphics max frequency | - | 756 MHz |
| InTru 3D | - | - |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Ryzen 7 PRO 2700X and Celeron N2820 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | - | 2 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 7 PRO 2700X and Celeron N2820.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | 2.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 20 | 4 |
| USB revision | no data | 3.0 and 2.0 |
| Total number of SATA ports | no data | 2 |
| Number of USB ports | no data | 5 |
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 7 PRO 2700X outperforms Celeron N2820 by 3268% 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 7 PRO 2700X outperforms Celeron N2820 by 532% 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 7 PRO 2700X outperforms Celeron N2820 by 1720% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 19 September 2018 | 1 December 2013 |
| Physical cores | 8 | 2 |
| Threads | 16 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 12 nm | 22 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 105 Watt | 7 Watt |
We couldn't decide between Ryzen 7 PRO 2700X and Celeron N2820. We've got no test results to judge.
Note that Ryzen 7 PRO 2700X is a desktop processor while Celeron N2820 is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 7 PRO 2700X and Celeron N2820, 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.
