Key Differences
In short — Ryzen Threadripper 2920X 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 2920X is 2663 days newer than Celeron 847.
Advantages of Intel Celeron 847
- Consumes up to 91% less energy than AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2920X - 17 vs 180 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2920X doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2920X
- Performs up to 86% better in The Callisto Protocol than Celeron 847 - 110 vs 59 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron 847 - 24 vs 2 threads
The Callisto Protocol
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Celeron 847
Mobile • Jun 19th, 2011
Ryzen Threadripper 2920X
Desktop • Oct 3rd, 2018
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Celeron 847 | vs | AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2920X |
|---|---|---|
| Jun 19th, 2011 | Release Date | Oct 3rd, 2018 |
| Celeron | Collection | Ryzen Threadripper |
| Sandy Bridge | Codename | Colfax |
| 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 | 4.3 GHz |
17 W | TDP | 180 W |
| 32 nm | Process Size | 12 nm |
| 11.0x | Multiplier | 35.0x |
Intel HD (Sandy Bridge) | Integrated Graphics | None |
| No | Overclockable | Yes |
