EPYC 4465P vs Atom x5-E8000
Aggregate performance score
EPYC 4465P outperforms Atom x5-E8000 by a whopping 5132% 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 | 2980 | 167 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 75.39 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Server |
| Series | 5x Intel Atom | no data |
| Power efficiency | 4.64 | 18.67 |
| Designer | Intel | AMD |
| Manufacturer | no data | TSMC |
| Architecture codename | Cherry Trail (2015−2016) | Grado (2025) |
| Release date | 8 February 2016 (9 years ago) | 13 May 2025 (less than a year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $39 | $399 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
Atom x5-E8000 and EPYC 4465P 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 | 4 (Quad-Core) | 12 (Dodeca-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 24 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 3.4 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.04 GHz | 5.4 GHz |
| Multiplier | 10 | no data |
| L1 cache | no data | 80 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 2 MB | 1 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 64 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 4 nm |
| Die size | no data | 2x 70.6 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 90 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | no data | 16,630 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Atom x5-E8000 and EPYC 4465P 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 | no data | AM5 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 5 Watt | 65 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Atom x5-E8000 and EPYC 4465P. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| Precision Boost 2 | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Atom x5-E8000 and EPYC 4465P are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Atom x5-E8000 and EPYC 4465P. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR5 |
| Maximum memory size | 8 GB | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Intel HD Graphics (Cherry Trail) (320 MHz) | AMD Radeon Graphics |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Atom x5-E8000 and EPYC 4465P.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | 5.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 4 | 24 |
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.
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 | 0.60 | 31.39 |
| Integrated graphics card | 0.72 | 1.83 |
| Recency | 8 February 2016 | 13 May 2025 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 12 |
| Threads | 4 | 24 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 4 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 5 Watt | 65 Watt |
Atom x5-E8000 has 1200% lower power consumption.
EPYC 4465P, on the other hand, has a 5131.7% higher aggregate performance score, 154.2% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 9 years, 200% more physical cores and 500% more threads, and a 250% more advanced lithography process.
The AMD EPYC 4465P is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Atom x5-E8000 in performance tests.
Be aware that Atom x5-E8000 is a notebook processor while EPYC 4465P 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.
