EPYC 9274F vs A6-7480
Aggregate performance score
EPYC 9274F outperforms A6-7480 by a whopping 4040% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2716 | 83 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 13.74 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Server |
| Series | no data | AMD EPYC |
| Power efficiency | 0.96 | 5.57 |
| Designer | AMD | AMD |
| Manufacturer | GlobalFoundries | TSMC |
| Architecture codename | Carrizo (2015−2018) | Genoa (2022−2023) |
| Release date | 26 October 2018 (7 years ago) | 10 November 2022 (3 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $3,060 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
A6-7480 and EPYC 9274F 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 cores | 2 (Dual-core) | 24 (Tetracosa-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 48 |
| Base clock speed | 3.5 GHz | 4.05 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.8 GHz | 4.3 GHz |
| Multiplier | no data | 40.5 |
| L1 cache | 160K | 64K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1 MB (shared) | 1 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | no data | 256 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 5 nm, 6 nm |
| Die size | 250 mm2 | 8x 72 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 3,100 million | 52,560 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
Compatibility
Information on A6-7480 and EPYC 9274F 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 configuration | 1 | 2 |
| Socket | FM2+ | SP5 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 45 Watt | 320 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A6-7480 and EPYC 9274F. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| FMA | + | - |
| AVX | + | + |
| Precision Boost 2 | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A6-7480 and EPYC 9274F are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A6-7480 and EPYC 9274F. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3-2133 | DDR5-4800 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 6 TiB |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 460.8 GB/s |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Radeon R5 | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A6-7480 and EPYC 9274F.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | 5.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 128 |
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.02 | 42.23 |
| Recency | 26 October 2018 | 10 November 2022 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 24 |
| Threads | 2 | 48 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 45 Watt | 320 Watt |
A6-7480 has 611.1% lower power consumption.
EPYC 9274F, on the other hand, has a 4040.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, 1100% more physical cores and 2300% more threads, and a 460% more advanced lithography process.
The AMD EPYC 9274F is our recommended choice as it beats the AMD A6-7480 in performance tests.
Note that A6-7480 is a desktop processor while EPYC 9274F is a server/workstation one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
