EPYC 7H12 vs A10-7870K

#ad
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregated performance score

A10-7870K
2015
4 cores / 4 threads
2.22
EPYC 7H12
2019
64 cores / 128 threads
45.02
+1928%

EPYC 7H12 outperforms A10-7870K by 1928% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Primary Details

Comparing A10-7870K and EPYC 7H12 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking171938
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation2.7422.26
Market segmentDesktop processorServer
Seriesno dataAMD EPYC
Architecture codenameGodaveri (2014−2018)Zen 2 (2019−2020)
Release date28 May 2015 (8 years ago)18 September 2019 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$120no data
Current price$85 (0.7x MSRP)$1970

Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

EPYC 7H12 has 712% better value for money than A10-7870K.

Detailed Specifications

A10-7870K and EPYC 7H12 basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.

Physical cores4 (Quad-Core)64 (Tetrahexaconta-Core)
Threads4128
Base clock speed3.9 GHz2.6 GHz
Boost clock speed4.1 GHz3.3 GHz
L1 cache256 KB96K (per core)
L2 cache4096 KB512K (per core)
L3 cache0 KB256 MB (shared)
Chip lithography28 nm7 nm, 14 nm
Die size246 mm2192 mm2
Maximum core temperature72 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)74 °Cno data
Number of transistors1,178 million4,800 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplierYesYes

Compatibility

Information on A10-7870K and EPYC 7H12 compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.

Number of CPUs in a configuration12 (Multiprocessor)
SocketFM2+TR4
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt280 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A10-7870K and EPYC 7H12. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI1+
FMAFMA4no data
AVXAVX+
FRTC1no data
FreeSync1no data
PowerTune+no data
DualGraphics1no data
TrueAudio+no data
PowerNow+no data
PowerGating+no data
Out-of-band client management+no data
VirusProtect+no data
RAID-no data
HSA1no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A10-7870K and EPYC 7H12 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++
IOMMU 2.0+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A10-7870K and EPYC 7H12. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3-2133DDR4 Eight-channel
Maximum memory sizeno data4 TiB
Max memory channels28
Maximum memory bandwidthno data204.763 GB/s
ECC memory supportno data+

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon R7 Graphicsno data
iGPU core count8no data
Number of pipelines512no data
Enduro+no data
Switchable graphics1no data
UVD+no data
VCE+no data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of A10-7870K and EPYC 7H12 integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort+no data
HDMI+no data

Graphics API support

APIs supported by A10-7870K and EPYC 7H12 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXDirectX® 12no data
Vulkan1no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A10-7870K and EPYC 7H12.

PCIe version3.0no data

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

A10-7870K 2.22
EPYC 7H12 45.02
+1928%

EPYC 7H12 outperforms A10-7870K by 1928% based on our aggregated benchmark results.


Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

Benchmark coverage: 68%

A10-7870K 3434
EPYC 7H12 69633
+1928%

EPYC 7H12 outperforms A10-7870K by 1928% in Passmark.

Gaming performance

Pros & Cons Summary


Performance score 2.22 45.02
Recency 28 May 2015 18 September 2019
Physical cores 4 64
Threads 4 128
Chip lithography 28 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 280 Watt

The EPYC 7H12 is our recommended choice as it beats the A10-7870K in performance tests.

Be aware that A10-7870K is a desktop processor while EPYC 7H12 is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between A10-7870K and EPYC 7H12, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for Your Favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


AMD A10-7870K
A10-7870K
AMD EPYC 7H12
EPYC 7H12

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

Community Ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


4.2 54 votes

Rate A10-7870K on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 450 votes

Rate EPYC 7H12 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & Сomments

Here you can ask a question about A10-7870K or EPYC 7H12, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.