Key Differences
In short — EPYC 7282 outperforms Celeron G1840 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing EPYC 7282 is 1924 days newer than Celeron G1840.
Advantages of AMD EPYC 7282
- Performs up to 4% better in Tom Clancy’s The Division 2 than Celeron G1840 - 232 vs 223 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1840 - 32 vs 2 threads
Advantages of Intel Celeron G1840
- Consumes up to 56% less energy than AMD EPYC 7282 - 53 vs 120 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD EPYC 7282 doesn't have integrated graphics
Tom Clancy’s The Division 2
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Server/Workstation • Aug 7th, 2019
Desktop • May 1st, 2014
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
AMD EPYC 7282 | vs | Intel Celeron G1840 |
---|---|---|
Aug 7th, 2019 | Release Date | May 1st, 2014 |
EPYC | Collection | Celeron |
Rome | Codename | Haswell |
AMD Socket SP3 | Socket | Intel Socket 1150 |
Server | Segment | Desktop |
16 | Cores | 2 |
32 | Threads | 2 |
2.8 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.8 GHz |
3.2 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
120 W | TDP | 53 W |
7 nm | Process Size | 22 nm |
28.0x | Multiplier | 28.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | Intel HD (Haswell) |
No | Overclockable | No |