In Control, the Celeron 847 is slightly slower than the Ryzen Threadripper 1950X. We cannot compare value as at least one CPU is out of stock.
Celeron 847
- Consumes up to 91% less energy – 17 vs 180 Watts
- Consumes up to 91% 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 1950X
- Up to 1% faster in Control – 247 vs 244 FPS
- Up to 1% faster in Control
- Is 6 years and 1 month newer – Aug 10, 2017 vs Jun 19, 2011
- Is 6 years and 1 month newer
Control FPS Calculator
Celeron 847 vs Ryzen Threadripper 1950X: Comparison of performance and price
All items are out of stock
Ryzen Threadripper 1950X
Aug 10th, 2017
Average FPS
247 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
162 FPS
100%
Price, $
$850
100%
Value, $/FPS
$3.44/FPS
100%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Celeron 847 vs Ryzen Threadripper 1950X in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Celeron 847 vs Ryzen Threadripper 1950X in core CPU performance specifications
Celeron 847
Jun 19th, 2011
Cores
2-core
12%
L3 Cache
2 MB
6%
Base Frequency
1.1 GHz
32%
Turbo Frequency
GHz
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Ryzen Threadripper 1950X
Aug 10th, 2017
Cores
16-core
100%
L3 Cache
32 MB
100%
Base Frequency
3.4 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
4 GHz
100%
Max. DDR4 RAM Speed
2666 MHz
100%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Celeron 847 Jun 19th, 2011 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Ryzen Threadripper 1950X Aug 10th, 2017 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Jun 19th, 2011 | Release Date | Aug 10th, 2017 |
| – | MSRP | $999.00 |
Laptop | Segment | Desktop |
| Intel BGA 1023 | Socket | SP3r2 |
17W | Power Consumption | 180W |
| Other Features | ||
| DDR3 | RAM | 2666 MHz (DDR4) |
Intel HD (Sandy Bridge) | Integrated GPU | No Integrated Graphics |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Overclockable |
