EPYC 7763 vs Athlon 64 X2 FX-60
Aggregate performance score
EPYC 7763 outperforms Athlon 64 X2 FX-60 by a whopping 8934% 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 | 3086 | 53 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 3.58 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Server |
| Series | 2x Athlon 64 (Desktop) | AMD EPYC |
| Power efficiency | 0.20 | 7.26 |
| Designer | AMD | AMD |
| Manufacturer | no data | TSMC |
| Architecture codename | Toledo (2006) | Milan (2021−2023) |
| Release date | no data | 12 January 2021 (4 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $7,890 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
Athlon 64 X2 (Desktop) FX-60 and EPYC 7763 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) | 64 (Tetrahexaconta-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 128 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 2.45 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.6 GHz | 3.5 GHz |
| Bus rate | 1000 MHz | no data |
| Multiplier | no data | 24.5 |
| L1 cache | no data | 4 MB |
| L2 cache | no data | 32 MB |
| L3 cache | no data | 256 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 90 nm | 7 nm+ |
| Die size | no data | 8x 81 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | no data | 33,200 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Athlon 64 X2 (Desktop) FX-60 and EPYC 7763 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 | no data | 2 |
| Socket | no data | SP3 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 110 Watt | 280 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon 64 X2 (Desktop) FX-60 and EPYC 7763. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Athlon 64 X2 (Desktop) FX-60 and EPYC 7763 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon 64 X2 (Desktop) FX-60 and EPYC 7763. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR4-3200 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 4 TiB |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 204.795 GB/s |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | N/A |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Athlon 64 X2 (Desktop) FX-60 and EPYC 7763.
| PCIe version | no data | 4.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 128 |
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.53 | 47.88 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 64 |
| Threads | 2 | 128 |
| Chip lithography | 90 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 110 Watt | 280 Watt |
Athlon 64 X2 FX-60 has 154.5% lower power consumption.
EPYC 7763, on the other hand, has a 8934% higher aggregate performance score, 3100% more physical cores and 6300% more threads, and a 1185.7% more advanced lithography process.
The AMD EPYC 7763 is our recommended choice as it beats the AMD Athlon 64 X2 FX-60 in performance tests.
Note that Athlon 64 X2 FX-60 is a desktop processor while EPYC 7763 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.
