Celeron M 310 vs Ryzen Threadripper 1900X
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 921 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 2.55 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | AMD Ryzen Threadripper | Celeron M |
| Power efficiency | 3.24 | no data |
| Designer | AMD | Intel |
| Manufacturer | GlobalFoundries | no data |
| Architecture codename | Zen (2017−2020) | Banias (2003) |
| Release date | 31 August 2017 (8 years ago) | no data |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $549 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
Ryzen Threadripper 1900X and Celeron M 310 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 | 3.8 GHz | 1.2 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4 GHz | 1.2 GHz |
| Bus rate | 4 × 8 GT/s | 400 MHz |
| Multiplier | 38 | no data |
| L1 cache | 96K (per core) | no data |
| L2 cache | 512K (per core) | no data |
| L3 cache | 32 MB | 512 KB L2 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 130 nm |
| Die size | 213 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 100 °C |
| Number of transistors | 9,600 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | - |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | + | - |
| VID voltage range | no data | 1.356V |
Compatibility
Information on Ryzen Threadripper 1900X and Celeron M 310 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) | no data |
| Socket | SP3r2 | H-PBGA479, PPGA478 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 125 Watt | 24.5 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen Threadripper 1900X and Celeron M 310. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | - |
| AVX | + | - |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | - |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | - |
| Idle States | no data | - |
| Demand Based Switching | no data | - |
| PAE | no data | 32 Bit |
| FSB parity | no data | - |
Security technologies
Ryzen Threadripper 1900X and Celeron M 310 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | - |
| EDB | no data | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen Threadripper 1900X and Celeron M 310 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
| VT-x | no data | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen Threadripper 1900X and Celeron M 310. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 Quad-channel | no data |
| Maximum memory size | 2 TiB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 4 | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 85.33 GB/s | no data |
| ECC memory support | + | - |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen Threadripper 1900X and Celeron M 310.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | no data |
| PCI Express lanes | 60 | no data |
Pros & cons summary
| Physical cores | 8 | 1 |
| Threads | 16 | 1 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 130 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 125 Watt | 24 Watt |
Ryzen Threadripper 1900X has 700% more physical cores and 1500% more threads, and a 828.6% more advanced lithography process.
Celeron M 310, on the other hand, has 420.8% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1900X and Intel Celeron M 310. We've got no test results to judge.
Note that Ryzen Threadripper 1900X is a desktop processor while Celeron M 310 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.
