EPYC 7473X vs Athlon 64 3600+
Primary details
Comparing Athlon 64 3600+ and EPYC 7473X processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | not rated | 71 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 5.05 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Server |
| Architecture codename | Clawhammer (2001−2005) | Milan-X (2022) |
| Release date | June 2004 (20 years ago) | 22 March 2022 (2 years ago) |
| Current price | $70 | $5548 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Athlon 64 3600+ and EPYC 7473X 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 | 1 (Single-Core) | 24 (Tetracosa-Core) |
| Threads | 1 | 48 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 2.8 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.4 GHz | 3.7 GHz |
| L1 cache | 128K | 64K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 512K (per core) |
| L3 cache | no data | 768 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 130 nm | 7 nm |
| Die size | 193 mm2 | 8x 81 mm2 |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 70 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 106 million | 33,200 million |
| 64 bit support | + | - |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | no data |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
Compatibility
Information on Athlon 64 3600+ and EPYC 7473X 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 | 754 | SP3 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 89 Watt | 240 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon 64 3600+ and EPYC 7473X. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | no data | + |
| AVX | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Athlon 64 3600+ and EPYC 7473X are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon 64 3600+ and EPYC 7473X. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR1 | DDR4-3200 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Athlon 64 3600+ and EPYC 7473X.
| PCIe version | no data | 4.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 128 |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
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%
EPYC 7473X outperforms Athlon 64 3600+ by 9764% in Passmark.
Pros & cons summary
| Physical cores | 1 | 24 |
| Threads | 1 | 48 |
| Chip lithography | 130 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 89 Watt | 240 Watt |
We couldn't decide between Athlon 64 3600+ and EPYC 7473X. We've got no test results to judge.
Note that Athlon 64 3600+ is a desktop processor while EPYC 7473X is a server/workstation one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon 64 3600+ and EPYC 7473X, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
