Key Differences
In short — EPYC 7551P outperforms Celeron B815 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing EPYC 7551P is 2006 days newer than Celeron B815.
Advantages of Intel Celeron B815
- Consumes up to 81% less energy than AMD EPYC 7551P - 35 vs 180 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD EPYC 7551P doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of AMD EPYC 7551P
- Performs up to 4% better in Battlefield 1 than Celeron B815 - 235 vs 226 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron B815 - 64 vs 2 threads
Battlefield 1
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Celeron B815
Mobile • Jan 1st, 2012
EPYC 7551P
Server/Workstation • Jun 29th, 2017
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Celeron B815 | vs | AMD EPYC 7551P |
|---|---|---|
| Jan 1st, 2012 | Release Date | Jun 29th, 2017 |
| Celeron | Collection | EPYC |
| Sandy Bridge | Codename | Naples |
| Intel Socket G2 (988B) | Socket | AMD Socket SP3 |
Mobile | Segment | Server |
| 2 | Cores | 32 |
| 2 | Threads | 64 |
| 1.6 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.0 GHz |
| Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 3.0 GHz |
35 W | TDP | 180 W |
| 32 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
| 16.0x | Multiplier | 20.0x |
Intel HD (Sandy Bridge) | Integrated Graphics | None |
| No | Overclockable | Yes |
