Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX vs Atom 330
Primary details
Comparing Atom 330 and Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | not rated | 66 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Server |
| Series | Intel Atom | AMD Ryzen Threadripper |
| Architecture codename | Diamondville (2008−2009) | Matisse (2019−2020) |
| Release date | 2 April 2008 (16 years ago) | 14 July 2020 (4 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $43 | no data |
Detailed specifications
Atom 330 and Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX 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) | 32 (Dotriaconta-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 64 |
| Base clock speed | 1.6 GHz | 3.5 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 0.1 GHz | 4.2 GHz |
| Bus type | FSB | no data |
| Bus rate | 533.33 MT/s | no data |
| Multiplier | 12 | 35 |
| L1 cache | 112 KB | 2 MB |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 16 MB |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 128 MB |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 7 nm, 12 nm |
| Die size | 51.9276 mm2 | 74 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 85 °C | 95 °C |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 95 °C |
| Number of transistors | 94 Million | 23540 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
| Unlocked multiplier | - | + |
| VID voltage range | 0.9V-1.1625V | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Atom 330 and Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX 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 (Uniprocessor) | 1 |
| Socket | PBGA437 | sWRX8 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 8 Watt | 280 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Atom 330 and Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE2, Intel® SSE3, Intel® SSSE3 | MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AES, AVX, AVX2, BMI1, BMI2, SHA, F16C, FMA3, AMD64, EVP, AMD-V, SMAP, SMEP, SMT, Precision Boost 2, XFR 2 |
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | - | no data |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | + | no data |
| Demand Based Switching | - | no data |
| FSB parity | - | no data |
| Status | Discontinued | no data |
| Precision Boost 2 | no data | + |
Security technologies
Atom 330 and Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | - | no data |
| EDB | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Atom 330 and Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
| VT-d | - | no data |
| VT-x | - | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Atom 330 and Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR4-3200 |
| Maximum memory size | 8 GB | 2 TiB |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 204.8 GB/s |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | - | - |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Atom 330 and Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX.
| 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.
Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core
Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.
Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core
Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.
3DMark06 CPU
3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.
wPrime 32
wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 2 April 2008 | 14 July 2020 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 32 |
| Threads | 4 | 64 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 8 Watt | 280 Watt |
Atom 330 has 3400% lower power consumption.
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 12 years, 1500% more physical cores and 1500% more threads, and a 542.9% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Atom 330 and Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that Atom 330 is a notebook processor while Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX is a server/workstation one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Atom 330 and Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX, 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.
