EPYC 7532 vs C-70
Aggregate performance score
EPYC 7532 outperforms C-70 by a whopping 16140% 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 | 3400 | 152 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Server |
| Series | AMD C-Series | AMD EPYC |
| Power efficiency | 2.14 | 15.67 |
| Designer | AMD | AMD |
| Architecture codename | Ontario (2011−2012) | Zen 2 (2017−2020) |
| Release date | 1 September 2012 (12 years ago) | 19 February 2020 (5 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
C-70 and EPYC 7532 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 | 2 | 64 |
| Base clock speed | 1 GHz | 2.4 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.33 GHz | 3.3 GHz |
| Multiplier | no data | 24 |
| L1 cache | 64K (per core) | 2 MB |
| L2 cache | 512K (per core) | 16 MB |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 256 MB |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 7 nm, 14 nm |
| Die size | 75 mm2 | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on C-70 and EPYC 7532 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 | no data |
| Socket | FT1 BGA 413-Ball | Socket SP3 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 9 Watt | 200 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by C-70 and EPYC 7532. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | MMX(+), SSE(1,2,3,3S,4A), AMD-V, Radeon HD 6290 (276-400 MHz) | no data |
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| Precision Boost 2 | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by C-70 and EPYC 7532 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by C-70 and EPYC 7532. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 Single-channel | 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 | - | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | AMD Radeon HD 6290 (280 - 400 MHz) | no 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.
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 | 0.20 | 32.48 |
| Recency | 1 September 2012 | 19 February 2020 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 32 |
| Threads | 2 | 64 |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 9 Watt | 200 Watt |
C-70 has 2122.2% lower power consumption.
EPYC 7532, on the other hand, has a 16140% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, 1500% more physical cores and 3100% more threads, and a 471.4% more advanced lithography process.
The AMD EPYC 7532 is our recommended choice as it beats the AMD C-70 in performance tests.
Be aware that C-70 is a notebook processor while EPYC 7532 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.
