Celeron N2910 vs Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX
Primary details
Comparing Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX and Celeron N2910 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 1 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | 10 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 2.77 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | no data | Intel Celeron |
| Architecture codename | Storm Peak | Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) |
| Release date | 19 October 2023 (less than a year ago) | 11 September 2013 (10 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $9,999 | no data |
| Current price | $11150 (1.1x MSRP) | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX and Celeron N2910 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 | 96 | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 192 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 2.5 GHz | 1.6 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 5.1 GHz | 1.6 GHz |
| L1 cache | 6 MB | 56K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 96 MB | 512K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 384 MB | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 22 nm |
| Die size | Compute Die (CCD) Size 71 mm2, I/O Die (IOD) Size 388 mm2 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | 95 °C | 100 °C |
| Number of transistors | 78,840 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | no data | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | Yes | No |
Compatibility
Information on Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX and Celeron N2910 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 | sTR5 | FCBGA1170 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 350 Watt | 7.5 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX and Celeron N2910. 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, AVX-512, BMI1, BMI2, SHA, F16C, FMA3, AMD64, EVP, AMD-V, SMAP, SMEP, SMT, Precision Boost 2 | no data |
| 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 Threadripper PRO 7995WX and Celeron N2910 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 Threadripper PRO 7995WX and Celeron N2910 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 Threadripper PRO 7995WX and Celeron N2910. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR5 | DDR3 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 8.79 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | N/A | Intel® HD Graphics for Intel Atom® Processor Z3700 Series |
| Graphics max frequency | no data | 756 MHz |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX and Celeron N2910 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | no data | 2 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX and Celeron N2910.
| PCIe version | 5.0 | 2.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 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 Threadripper PRO 7995WX outperforms Celeron N2910 by 19910% in Passmark.
Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core
Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.
Benchmark coverage: 20%
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX outperforms Celeron N2910 by 842% in Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core.
Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core
Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.
Benchmark coverage: 19%
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX outperforms Celeron N2910 by 2379% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.
3DMark06 CPU
3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.
Benchmark coverage: 19%
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX outperforms Celeron N2910 by 1226% in 3DMark06 CPU.
Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core
Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.
Benchmark coverage: 17%
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX outperforms Celeron N2910 by 6642% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core.
Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core
Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.
Benchmark coverage: 15%
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX outperforms Celeron N2910 by 16232% in Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 15%
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX outperforms Celeron N2910 by 959% in Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core.
Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core
Cinebench R11.5 is an old benchmark 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 loads a single thread with ray tracing to render a glossy room full of crystal spheres and light sources.
Benchmark coverage: 14%
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX outperforms Celeron N2910 by 1033% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core.
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 19 October 2023 | 11 September 2013 |
| Physical cores | 96 | 4 |
| Threads | 192 | 4 |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 22 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 350 Watt | 7 Watt |
We couldn't decide between Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX and Celeron N2910. We've got no test results to judge.
Note that Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX is a desktop processor while Celeron N2910 is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX and Celeron N2910, 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.
