EPYC 7763 vs Athlon II X2 255

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Athlon II X2 255
2010
2 cores / 2 threads, 65 Watt
0.77
EPYC 7763
2021
64 cores / 128 threads, 280 Watt
55.47
+7104%

EPYC 7763 outperforms Athlon II X2 255 by a whopping 7104% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Athlon II X2 255 and EPYC 7763 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking263624
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.023.26
Market segmentDesktop processorServer
Seriesno dataAMD EPYC
Power efficiency1.0818.03
Architecture codenameRegor (2009−2013)Milan (2021−2023)
Release date25 January 2010 (14 years ago)12 January 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$60$7,890

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

EPYC 7763 has 16200% better value for money than Athlon II X2 255.

Detailed specifications

Athlon II X2 255 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 cores2 (Dual-core)64 (Tetrahexaconta-Core)
Threads2128
Base clock speed3.1 GHz2.45 GHz
Boost clock speed3.1 GHz3.5 GHz
Multiplierno data24.5
L1 cache128 KB4 MB
L2 cache1 MB32 MB
L3 cache0 KB256 MB (shared)
Chip lithography45 nm7 nm+
Die size117 mm28x 81 mm2
Number of transistors410 million33,200 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+

Compatibility

Information on Athlon II X2 255 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 configuration12
SocketAM3SP3
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt280 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon II X2 255 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 II X2 255 and EPYC 7763 are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon II X2 255 and EPYC 7763. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR4-3200
Maximum memory sizeno data4 TiB
Maximum memory bandwidthno data204.795 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataN/A

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Athlon II X2 255 and EPYC 7763.

PCIe version2.04.0
PCI Express lanesno data128

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

Athlon II X2 255 0.77
EPYC 7763 55.47
+7104%

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.

Athlon II X2 255 1175
EPYC 7763 84706
+7109%

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

Athlon II X2 255 293
EPYC 7763 1344
+359%

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

Athlon II X2 255 403
EPYC 7763 10361
+2471%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.77 55.47
Recency 25 January 2010 12 January 2021
Physical cores 2 64
Threads 2 128
Chip lithography 45 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 280 Watt

Athlon II X2 255 has 330.8% lower power consumption.

EPYC 7763, on the other hand, has a 7103.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, 3100% more physical cores and 6300% more threads, and a 542.9% more advanced lithography process.

The EPYC 7763 is our recommended choice as it beats the Athlon II X2 255 in performance tests.

Note that Athlon II X2 255 is a desktop processor while EPYC 7763 is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon II X2 255 and EPYC 7763, 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 II X2 255
Athlon II X2 255
AMD EPYC 7763
EPYC 7763

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.


3.3 173 votes

Rate Athlon II X2 255 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 1197 votes

Rate EPYC 7763 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Athlon II X2 255 or EPYC 7763, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.