Xeon Phi 7290 vs Athlon 64 X2 4200+

Primary details

Comparing Athlon 64 X2 4200+ and Xeon Phi 7290 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking2939not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorServer
Power efficiency0.49no data
Architecture codenameManchester (2005−2006)Knights Landing (2016)
Release dateDecember 2006 (18 years ago)20 June 2016 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$309no data

Detailed specifications

Athlon 64 X2 4200+ and Xeon Phi 7290 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 cores2 (Dual-core)72 (Doheptaconta-Core)
Threads2288
Base clock speedno data1.5 GHz
Boost clock speed2.2 GHz1.7 GHz
L1 cache256K32 KB (per core)
L2 cache512 KB512 KB (per core)
L3 cache0 KB0 KB (shared)
Chip lithography90 nm14 nm
Die size220 mm2no data
Number of transistors154 million8,000 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Athlon 64 X2 4200+ and Xeon Phi 7290 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 configuration11
Socket9393647
Power consumption (TDP)89 Watt245 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon 64 X2 4200+ and Xeon Phi 7290. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI-+
AVX-+
vProno data+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+

Security technologies

Athlon 64 X2 4200+ and Xeon Phi 7290 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Athlon 64 X2 4200+ and Xeon Phi 7290 are enumerated here.

VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon 64 X2 4200+ and Xeon Phi 7290. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR4

Pros & cons summary


Physical cores 2 72
Threads 2 288
Chip lithography 90 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 89 Watt 245 Watt

Athlon 64 X2 4200+ has 175.3% lower power consumption.

Xeon Phi 7290, on the other hand, has 3500% more physical cores and 14300% more threads, and a 542.9% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Athlon 64 X2 4200+ and Xeon Phi 7290. We've got no test results to judge.

Note that Athlon 64 X2 4200+ is a desktop processor while Xeon Phi 7290 is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon 64 X2 4200+ and Xeon Phi 7290, 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 Athlon 64 X2 4200+
Athlon 64 X2 4200+
Intel Xeon Phi 7290
Xeon Phi 7290

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.


3.2 149 votes

Rate Athlon 64 X2 4200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.6 41 vote

Rate Xeon Phi 7290 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Athlon 64 X2 4200+ or Xeon Phi 7290, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.