EPYC 9475F vs A8-7410

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

A8-7410
2015
4 cores / 4 threads, 12 Watt
1.56
EPYC 9475F
2024
48 cores / 96 threads, 400 Watt
72.35
+4538%

EPYC 9475F outperforms A8-7410 by a whopping 4538% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking227918
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data5.83
Market segmentLaptopServer
SeriesAMD A-Seriesno data
Power efficiency2.647.64
DesignerAMDAMD
Manufacturerno dataTSMC
Architecture codenameCarrizo-L (2015)Turin (2024)
Release date7 May 2015 (10 years ago)10 October 2024 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$7,592

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

Detailed specifications

A8-7410 and EPYC 9475F 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)48 (Octatetraconta-Core)
Threads496
Base clock speed2.2 GHz3.65 GHz
Boost clock speed2.5 GHz4.8 GHz
L1 cacheno data80 KB (per core)
L2 cache2048 KB1 MB (per core)
L3 cacheno data256 MB (shared)
Chip lithography28 nm4 nm
Die sizeno data8x 70.6 mm2
Maximum core temperature90 °Cno data
Number of transistors930 Million66,520 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data

Compatibility

Information on A8-7410 and EPYC 9475F 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 data2
SocketFP4SP5
Power consumption (TDP)12 - 25 Watt400 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A8-7410 and EPYC 9475F. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsMMX, SSE4.2, AES, AVX, BMI1, F16C, AMD64, VT, AMD-Vno data
AES-NI++
FMAFMA4-
AVX++
PowerNow+-
PowerGating+-
VirusProtect+-
Precision Boost 2no data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A8-7410 and EPYC 9475F are enumerated here.

AMD-V++
IOMMU 2.0+-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A8-7410 and EPYC 9475F. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3L-1866DDR5
Max memory channels1no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon R5 GraphicsN/A
Enduro+-
Switchable graphics+-
UVD+-
VCE+-

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of A8-7410 and EPYC 9475F integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort+-
HDMI+-

Graphics API support

APIs supported by A8-7410 and EPYC 9475F integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXDirectX® 12no data
Vulkan+-

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A8-7410 and EPYC 9475F.

PCIe version2.05.0
PCI Express lanesno data128

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.

A8-7410 1.56
EPYC 9475F 72.35
+4538%

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.

A8-7410 2741
Samples: 1411
EPYC 9475F 127149
+4539%
Samples: 1

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.56 72.35
Recency 7 May 2015 10 October 2024
Physical cores 4 48
Threads 4 96
Chip lithography 28 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 12 Watt 400 Watt

A8-7410 has 3233.3% lower power consumption.

EPYC 9475F, on the other hand, has a 4537.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, 1100% more physical cores and 2300% more threads, and a 600% more advanced lithography process.

The AMD EPYC 9475F is our recommended choice as it beats the AMD A8-7410 in performance tests.

Be aware that A8-7410 is a notebook processor while EPYC 9475F 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 A8-7410
A8-7410
AMD EPYC 9475F
EPYC 9475F

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.


3.3 758 votes

Rate A8-7410 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 5 votes

Rate EPYC 9475F on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about processors A8-7410 and EPYC 9475F, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report bugs or inaccuracies on the site.