In Control, the Celeron 3965U is slightly slower than the Ryzen Threadripper 1900X. We cannot compare value as at least one CPU is out of stock.
Celeron 3965U
- Consumes up to 92% less energy – 15 vs 180 Watts
- Consumes up to 92% less energy
- Can run games without a dedicated GPU using its integrated graphics
- Can run games without a dedicated GPU using its integrated graphics
Ryzen Threadripper 1900X
- Up to 1% faster in Control – 247 vs 245 FPS
- Up to 1% faster in Control
- Is 7 months and 26 days newer – Aug 31, 2017 vs Jan 03, 2017
- Is 7 months and 26 days newer
Control FPS Calculator
Celeron 3965U vs Ryzen Threadripper 1900X: Comparison of performance and price
All items are out of stock
Ryzen Threadripper 1900X
Aug 31st, 2017
Average FPS
247 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
162 FPS
100%
Price, $
$128.99
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.52/FPS
100%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Celeron 3965U vs Ryzen Threadripper 1900X in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Celeron 3965U vs Ryzen Threadripper 1900X in core CPU performance specifications
Celeron 3965U
Jan 3rd, 2017
Cores
2-core
25%
L3 Cache
2 MB
6%
Base Frequency
2.2 GHz
58%
Turbo Frequency
GHz
Max. DDR4 RAM Speed
2133 MHz
80%
Ryzen Threadripper 1900X
Aug 31st, 2017
Cores
8-core
100%
L3 Cache
32 MB
100%
Base Frequency
3.8 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
4 GHz
100%
Max. DDR4 RAM Speed
2666 MHz
100%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Celeron 3965U Jan 3rd, 2017 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Ryzen Threadripper 1900X Aug 31st, 2017 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Jan 3rd, 2017 | Release Date | Aug 31st, 2017 |
$107.00 | MSRP | $549.00 |
Laptop | Segment | Desktop |
| Intel BGA 1356 | Socket | SP3r2 |
15W | Power Consumption | 180W |
| Other Features | ||
| DDR3, 2133 MHz (DDR4) | RAM | 2666 MHz (DDR4) |
Intel HD Graphics 610 | Integrated GPU | No Integrated Graphics |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Overclockable |
