EPYC 7F72 vs Athlon X2 QL-60
Aggregate performance score
EPYC 7F72 outperforms Athlon X2 QL-60 by a whopping 9545% 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 | 3330 | 174 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 9.31 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Server |
| Series | 2x AMD Athlon | AMD EPYC |
| Power efficiency | 0.38 | 5.30 |
| Designer | AMD | AMD |
| Manufacturer | no data | TSMC |
| Architecture codename | Lion (2008−2009) | Zen 2 (2017−2020) |
| Release date | 3 June 2008 (17 years ago) | 14 April 2020 (5 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $2,450 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
Athlon X2 QL-60 and EPYC 7F72 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) | 24 (Tetracosa-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 48 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 3.2 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.9 GHz | 3.7 GHz |
| Bus rate | 3600 MHz | no data |
| Multiplier | no data | 32 |
| L1 cache | 256 KB | 96K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 512K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 192 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 7 nm, 14 nm |
| Die size | no data | 74 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | no data | 3,800 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
| Unlocked multiplier | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Athlon X2 QL-60 and EPYC 7F72 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 | S1 | SP3 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 240 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon X2 QL-60 and EPYC 7F72. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, Enhanced 3DNow!, NX bit, AMD64, PowerNow!, AMD Virtualization | no data |
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| PowerNow | + | - |
| Precision Boost 2 | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Athlon X2 QL-60 and EPYC 7F72 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon X2 QL-60 and EPYC 7F72. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR4-3200 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 4 TiB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 8 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 204.763 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Athlon X2 QL-60 and EPYC 7F72.
| PCIe version | no data | 4.0 |
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.
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.
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.31 | 29.90 |
| Recency | 3 June 2008 | 14 April 2020 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 24 |
| Threads | 2 | 48 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 240 Watt |
Athlon X2 QL-60 has 585.7% lower power consumption.
EPYC 7F72, on the other hand, has a 9545.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, 1100% more physical cores and 2300% more threads, and a 828.6% more advanced lithography process.
The AMD EPYC 7F72 is our recommended choice as it beats the AMD Athlon X2 QL-60 in performance tests.
Be aware that Athlon X2 QL-60 is a notebook processor while EPYC 7F72 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.
