Key Differences
In short — Ryzen Threadripper 1900X outperforms Celeron 3205U on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Ryzen Threadripper 1900X is 914 days newer than Celeron 3205U.
Advantages of Intel Celeron 3205U
- Consumes up to 92% less energy than AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1900X - 15 vs 180 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1900X doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1900X
- Performs up to 5% better in Tom Clancy’s The Division 2 than Celeron 3205U - 232 vs 220 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron 3205U - 16 vs 2 threads
Tom Clancy’s The Division 2
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Aug 31st, 2017
FPS
232
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.47/FPS
100%
Price, $
$109.99
100%
FPS and Value Winner
Buy for $109.99 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 9151 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Mobile • Mar 1st, 2015
Desktop • Aug 31st, 2017
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Celeron 3205U | vs | AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1900X |
---|---|---|
Mar 1st, 2015 | Release Date | Aug 31st, 2017 |
Celeron | Collection | Ryzen Threadripper |
Broadwell | Codename | Whitehaven |
Intel BGA 1168 | Socket | AMD Socket SP3r2 |
Mobile | Segment | Desktop |
2 | Cores | 8 |
2 | Threads | 16 |
1.5 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.8 GHz |
Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.0 GHz |
15 W | TDP | 180 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
15.0x | Multiplier | 38.0x |
Intel HD | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | Yes |