EPYC 7702P vs A10-9620P

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

A10-9620P
2017
4 cores / 4 threads, 2 Watt
1.42
EPYC 7702P
2019, $4,425
64 cores / 128 threads, 200 Watt
36.05
+2439%

EPYC 7702P outperforms A10-9620P by a whopping 2439% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking2390110
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data6.22
Market segmentLaptopServer
SeriesBristol RidgeAMD EPYC
Power efficiencyno data19.37
DesignerAMDAMD
Manufacturerno dataTSMC
Architecture codenameBristol Ridge (2016−2019)Zen 2 (2017−2020)
Release date1 January 2017 (8 years ago)7 August 2019 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$4,425

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

Detailed specifications

A10-9620P and EPYC 7702P 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 speed2.5 GHz2 GHz
Boost clock speed3.4 GHz3.35 GHz
Multiplierno data20
L1 cacheno data96K (per core)
L2 cache2 MB512K (per core)
L3 cacheno data256 MB (shared)
Chip lithography28 nm7 nm, 14 nm
Die size250 mm2192 mm2
Maximum core temperature90 °Cno data
Number of transistors3100 Million4,800 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplier-+

Compatibility

Information on A10-9620P and EPYC 7702P 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 configurationno data1 (Uniprocessor)
SocketFP4TR4
Power consumption (TDP)2 MB200 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A10-9620P and EPYC 7702P. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI-+
AVX-+
Precision Boost 2no data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A10-9620P and EPYC 7702P are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A10-9620P and EPYC 7702P. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3, DDR4DDR4 Eight-channel
Maximum memory sizeno data4 TiB
Max memory channelsno data8
Maximum memory bandwidthno data204.763 GB/s
ECC memory support-+

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon R5 (Bristol Ridge) ( - 758 MHz)no data

Synthetic benchmarks

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.

A10-9620P 1.42
EPYC 7702P 36.05
+2439%

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. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.

A10-9620P 2514
Samples: 174
EPYC 7702P 63692
+2433%
Samples: 26

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

A10-9620P 484
EPYC 7702P 1103
+128%

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

A10-9620P 1090
EPYC 7702P 10781
+889%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.42 36.05
Recency 1 January 2017 7 August 2019
Physical cores 4 64
Threads 4 128
Chip lithography 28 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 2 Watt 200 Watt

A10-9620P has 9900% lower power consumption.

EPYC 7702P, on the other hand, has a 2438.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, 1500% more physical cores and 3100% more threads, and a 300% more advanced lithography process.

The AMD EPYC 7702P is our recommended choice as it beats the AMD A10-9620P in performance tests.

Be aware that A10-9620P is a notebook processor while EPYC 7702P is a server/workstation one.

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 A10-9620P
A10-9620P
AMD EPYC 7702P
EPYC 7702P

Other comparisons

We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.

Community ratings

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


3.3 322 votes

Rate A10-9620P on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 33 votes

Rate EPYC 7702P on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about processors A10-9620P and EPYC 7702P, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report bugs or inaccuracies on the site.