Celeron 837 vs Ryzen 7 PRO 5750GE
Primary details
Comparing Ryzen 7 PRO 5750GE and Celeron 837 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 533 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | no data | Intel Celeron |
| Power efficiency | 37.26 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Cezanne (2021−2024) | Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) |
| Release date | 1 June 2021 (3 years ago) | no data (2024 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Ryzen 7 PRO 5750GE and Celeron 837 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 | 3.2 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 4.6 GHz | 1.8 GHz |
| Bus type | no data | DMI 2.0 |
| Bus rate | no data | 4 × 5 GT/s |
| Multiplier | no data | 18 |
| L1 cache | 64K (per core) | 128 KB |
| L2 cache | 512K (per core) | 512 KB |
| L3 cache | 16 MB | 2 MB |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm | 32 nm |
| Die size | 180 mm2 | 131 mm2 |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 95 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 10,700 million | 504 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | no data | - |
Compatibility
Information on Ryzen 7 PRO 5750GE and Celeron 837 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 | 1 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | AM4 | no data |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 17 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 7 PRO 5750GE and Celeron 837. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| 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 PRO 5750GE and Celeron 837 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
| VT-x | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 7 PRO 5750GE and Celeron 837. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4-3200 | DDR3-1333 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 16 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 21.335 GB/s |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | AMD Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) | Intel HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 7 PRO 5750GE and Celeron 837.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | no data |
Pros & cons summary
| Physical cores | 8 | 2 |
| Threads | 16 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm | 32 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 17 Watt |
Ryzen 7 PRO 5750GE has 300% more physical cores and 700% more threads, and a 357.1% more advanced lithography process.
Celeron 837, on the other hand, has 105.9% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Ryzen 7 PRO 5750GE and Celeron 837. We've got no test results to judge.
Note that Ryzen 7 PRO 5750GE is a desktop processor while Celeron 837 is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 7 PRO 5750GE and Celeron 837, 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.
