EPYC 9654 vs Atom C3758

VS

Aggregate performance score

Atom C3758
2017
8 cores / 8 threads, 25 Watt
3.01
EPYC 9654
2022
96 cores / 192 threads, 360 Watt
76.66
+2447%

EPYC 9654 outperforms Atom C3758 by a whopping 2447% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Atom C3758 and EPYC 9654 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking16515
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.671.30
Market segmentServerServer
SeriesIntel AtomAMD EPYC
Power efficiency10.9819.42
Architecture codenameGoldmont (2016−2017)Genoa (2022−2023)
Release date15 August 2017 (7 years ago)10 November 2022 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$193$11,805

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Atom C3758 has 28% better value for money than EPYC 9654.

Detailed specifications

Atom C3758 and EPYC 9654 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 cores8 (Octa-Core)96
Threads8192
Base clock speed2.2 GHz2.4 GHz
Boost clock speed2.2 GHz2.4 GHz
Multiplier2224
L1 cache448 KB6 MB
L2 cache16 MB96 MB
L3 cache16 MB384 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm5 nm, 6 nm
Die sizeno data12x 72 mm2
Maximum core temperature82 °Cno data
Number of transistorsno data78,840 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data

Compatibility

Information on Atom C3758 and EPYC 9654 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 configuration1 (Uniprocessor)2
SocketFCBGA1310SP5
Power consumption (TDP)25 Watt360 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Atom C3758 and EPYC 9654. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI++
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
QuickAssist+no data
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
Precision Boost 2no data+

Security technologies

Atom C3758 and EPYC 9654 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

EDB+no data
Secure Boot+no data
Secure Key+no data
SGX-no data
OS Guard+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Atom C3758 and EPYC 9654 are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
VT-d+no data
VT-x+no data
EPT+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Atom C3758 and EPYC 9654. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4: 2400DDR5-4800
Maximum memory size256 GB6 TiB
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidth34.134 GB/s460.8 GB/s
ECC memory support+-

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Atom C3758 and EPYC 9654.

PCIe version35.0
PCI Express lanes16128
USB revision3no data
Total number of SATA ports16no data
Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Ports16no data
Number of USB ports8no data
Integrated LAN4x10/2.5/1 GBEno data

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.

Atom C3758 3.01
EPYC 9654 76.66
+2447%

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.

Atom C3758 4614
EPYC 9654 117317
+2443%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.01 76.66
Recency 15 August 2017 10 November 2022
Physical cores 8 96
Threads 8 192
Chip lithography 14 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 25 Watt 360 Watt

Atom C3758 has 1340% lower power consumption.

EPYC 9654, on the other hand, has a 2446.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, 1100% more physical cores and 2300% more threads, and a 180% more advanced lithography process.

The EPYC 9654 is our recommended choice as it beats the Atom C3758 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Atom C3758 and EPYC 9654, 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.


Intel Atom C3758
Atom C3758
AMD EPYC 9654
EPYC 9654

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.


3.5 4 votes

Rate Atom C3758 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 992 votes

Rate EPYC 9654 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Atom C3758 or EPYC 9654, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.