EPYC 8324PN vs Atom C5125
Aggregate performance score
Atom C5125 outperforms EPYC 8324PN by a minimal 3% 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 | 1541 | 1556 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 4.58 | 0.91 |
| Market segment | Server | Server |
| Power efficiency | 4.18 | 1.56 |
| Designer | Intel | AMD |
| Manufacturer | Intel | TSMC |
| Architecture codename | Parker Ridge (2022) | Siena (2023−2024) |
| Release date | 6 June 2022 (4 years ago) | 18 September 2023 (3 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $335 | $2,125 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Atom C5125 has 403% better value for money than EPYC 8324PN.
Performance to price scatter graph
Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.
Detailed specifications
Basic parameters of Atom C5125 and EPYC 8324PN: 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 | 8 (Octa-Core) | 32 (Dotriaconta-Core) |
| Threads | 8 | 64 |
| Base clock speed | 2.8 GHz | 2.05 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.8 GHz | 3 GHz |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 64 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 4.5 MB (per module) | 1 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 9 MB | 128 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 10 nm | 5 nm |
| Die size | no data | 4x 73 mm2 |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 85 °C |
| Number of transistors | no data | 35,500 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
Compatibility
Information on Atom C5125 and EPYC 8324PN 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 | 1 |
| Socket | FCBGA2106 | SP6 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 50 Watt | 130 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Atom C5125 and EPYC 8324PN. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE4.2 | no data |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| QuickAssist | + | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | no data |
| Idle States | + | no data |
| GPIO | + | no data |
| Turbo Boost Max 3.0 | - | no data |
| Precision Boost 2 | no data | + |
Security technologies
Atom C5125 and EPYC 8324PN technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | + | no data |
| EDB | + | no data |
| SGX | - | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Atom C5125 and EPYC 8324PN 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 C5125 and EPYC 8324PN. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 | DDR5 |
| Maximum memory size | 256 GB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 2 | no data |
| ECC memory support | + | - |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | N/A | N/A |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Atom C5125 and EPYC 8324PN.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | 5.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 32 | 96 |
| USB revision | 2.0, 3.0 | no data |
| Total number of SATA ports | 16 | no data |
| Integrated IDE | - | no data |
| Number of USB ports | 8 | no data |
| Integrated LAN | - | no data |
| UART | 3 | no data |
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 5.04 | 4.89 |
| Recency | 6 June 2022 | 18 September 2023 |
| Physical cores | 8 | 32 |
| Threads | 8 | 64 |
| Chip lithography | 10 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 50 Watt | 130 Watt |
Atom C5125 has a 3% higher aggregate performance score, and 160% lower power consumption.
EPYC 8324PN, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, 300% more physical cores and 700% more threads, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Intel Atom C5125 and AMD EPYC 8324PN.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
