Key Differences
In short — Ryzen Threadripper 1920X outperforms Celeron 847 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Ryzen Threadripper 1920X is 2244 days newer than Celeron 847.
Advantages of Intel Celeron 847
- Consumes up to 91% less energy than AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920X - 17 vs 180 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920X doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920X
- Performs up to 2% better in Monster Hunter: World than Celeron 847 - 255 vs 250 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron 847 - 24 vs 2 threads
Monster Hunter: World
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Highest
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Highest
Mobile • Jun 19th, 2011
Desktop • Aug 10th, 2017
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Celeron 847 | vs | AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920X |
---|---|---|
Jun 19th, 2011 | Release Date | Aug 10th, 2017 |
Celeron | Collection | Ryzen Threadripper |
Sandy Bridge | Codename | Whitehaven |
Intel BGA 1023 | Socket | AMD Socket SP3r2 |
Mobile | Segment | Desktop |
2 | Cores | 12 |
2 | Threads | 24 |
1.1 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.5 GHz |
Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.0 GHz |
17 W | TDP | 180 W |
32 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
11.0x | Multiplier | 35.0x |
Intel HD (Sandy Bridge) | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | Yes |