Celeron N5105 vs Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX
Aggregate performance score
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX outperforms Celeron N5105 by a whopping 1443% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX and Celeron N5105 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 69 | 1750 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Server | Desktop processor |
| Series | AMD Ryzen Threadripper | no data |
| Power efficiency | 13.30 | 24.15 |
| Architecture codename | Matisse (2019−2020) | Jasper Lake (2021) |
| Release date | 14 July 2020 (4 years ago) | 11 January 2021 (3 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX and Celeron N5105 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 | 32 (Dotriaconta-Core) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 64 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 3.5 GHz | 2 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4.2 GHz | 2.9 GHz |
| Multiplier | 35 | no data |
| L1 cache | 64K (per core) | no data |
| L2 cache | 512K (per core) | 1.5 MB |
| L3 cache | 128 MB | 4 MB |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm, 12 nm | 10 nm |
| Die size | 74 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | 95 °C | 105 °C |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 95 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 3,800 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | + | + |
| Unlocked multiplier | + | - |
Compatibility
Information on Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX and Celeron N5105 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 |
| Socket | sWRX8 | FCBGA1338 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 280 Watt | 10 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX and Celeron N5105. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AES, AVX, AVX2, BMI1, BMI2, SHA, F16C, FMA3, AMD64, EVP, AMD-V, SMAP, SMEP, SMT, Precision Boost 2, XFR 2 | Intel® SSE4.2 |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | - |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Speed Shift | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | - |
| Idle States | no data | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | - | + |
| Smart Response | no data | - |
| GPIO | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Max 3.0 | no data | - |
| Precision Boost 2 | + | no data |
Security technologies
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX and Celeron N5105 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | - |
| Identity Protection | - | + |
| SGX | no data | - |
| OS Guard | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX and Celeron N5105 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
| EPT | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX and Celeron N5105. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4-3200 | DDR4 |
| Maximum memory size | 2 TiB | 16 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 204.8 GB/s | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | - | Intel UHD Graphics |
| Quick Sync Video | - | + |
| Graphics max frequency | - | 800 MHz |
| Execution Units | - | 24 |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX and Celeron N5105 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | - | 3 |
| eDP | - | + |
| DisplayPort | - | + |
| HDMI | - | + |
| MIPI-DSI | - | + |
Graphics image quality
Maximum display resolutions supported by Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX and Celeron N5105 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.
| 4K resolution support | - | + |
| Max resolution over HDMI 1.4 | - | 4096x2160@60Hz |
| Max resolution over eDP | - | 4096x2160@60Hz |
| Max resolution over DisplayPort | - | 4096x2160@60Hz |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX and Celeron N5105 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | - | 12 |
| OpenGL | - | 4.5 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX and Celeron N5105.
| PCIe version | 4.0 | no data |
| PCI Express lanes | 128 | 8 |
| USB revision | no data | 2.0/3.2 |
| Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Ports | no data | 2 |
| Number of USB ports | no data | 14 |
| Integrated LAN | no data | - |
| UART | no 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.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.
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.
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.
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.
Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core
Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.
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.
Geekbench 5.5 Multi-Core
Blender(-)
Geekbench 5.5 Single-Core
7-Zip Single
7-Zip
WebXPRT 3
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 39.34 | 2.55 |
| Recency | 14 July 2020 | 11 January 2021 |
| Physical cores | 32 | 4 |
| Threads | 64 | 4 |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 280 Watt | 10 Watt |
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX has a 1442.7% higher aggregate performance score, 700% more physical cores and 1500% more threads, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.
Celeron N5105, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 5 months, and 2700% lower power consumption.
The Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron N5105 in performance tests.
Be aware that Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX is a server/workstation processor while Celeron N5105 is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX and Celeron N5105, 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.
