EPYC 7702P vs Core 2 Quad Q8200

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Core 2 Quad Q8200
2008
4 cores / 4 threads, 95 Watt
1.15
EPYC 7702P
2019
64 cores / 128 threads, 200 Watt
41.99
+3551%

EPYC 7702P outperforms Core 2 Quad Q8200 by a whopping 3551% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core 2 Quad Q8200 and EPYC 7702P processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking228550
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.6419.91
Market segmentDesktop processorServer
Seriesno dataAMD EPYC
Architecture codenameYorkfield (2007−2009)Zen 2 (2019−2020)
Release dateAugust 2008 (15 years ago)7 August 2019 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$4,425
Current price$36 $1936 (0.4x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

EPYC 7702P has 1114% better value for money than Core 2 Quad Q8200.

Detailed specifications

Core 2 Quad Q8200 and EPYC 7702P 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)64 (Tetrahexaconta-Core)
Threads4128
Base clock speed2.33 GHz2 GHz
Boost clock speed2.33 GHz3.35 GHz
L1 cache64K (per core)96K (per core)
L2 cache4 MB (shared)512K (per core)
L3 cache0 KB256 MB (shared)
Chip lithography45 nm7 nm, 14 nm
Die size2x 81 mm2192 mm2
Maximum core temperature71 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)71 °Cno data
Number of transistors456 million4,800 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplierNoYes
VID voltage range0.85V-1.3625Vno data

Compatibility

Information on Core 2 Quad Q8200 and EPYC 7702P 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 configuration11 (Uniprocessor)
SocketLGA775TR4
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt200 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Quad Q8200 and EPYC 7702P. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI-+
AVXno data+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+no data
Demand Based Switching-no data
FSB parity-no data
StatusDiscontinuedno data

Security technologies

Core 2 Quad Q8200 and EPYC 7702P 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 Core 2 Quad Q8200 and EPYC 7702P are enumerated here.

AMD-Vno data+
VT-x-no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core 2 Quad Q8200 and EPYC 7702P. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR1, DDR2, DDR3DDR4 Eight-channel
Maximum memory sizeno data4 TiB
Max memory channelsno data8
Maximum memory bandwidthno data204.763 GB/s
ECC memory supportno 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.

Core 2 Quad Q8200 1.15
EPYC 7702P 41.99
+3551%

EPYC 7702P outperforms Core 2 Quad Q8200 by 3551% based on our aggregate benchmark results.


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.

Benchmark coverage: 68%

Core 2 Quad Q8200 1777
EPYC 7702P 64943
+3555%

EPYC 7702P outperforms Core 2 Quad Q8200 by 3555% in Passmark.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 42%

Core 2 Quad Q8200 294
EPYC 7702P 888
+202%

EPYC 7702P outperforms Core 2 Quad Q8200 by 202% in GeekBench 5 Single-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.

Benchmark coverage: 42%

Core 2 Quad Q8200 837
EPYC 7702P 15480
+1749%

EPYC 7702P outperforms Core 2 Quad Q8200 by 1749% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.15 41.99
Physical cores 4 64
Threads 4 128
Chip lithography 45 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 200 Watt

The EPYC 7702P is our recommended choice as it beats the Core 2 Quad Q8200 in performance tests.

Note that Core 2 Quad Q8200 is a desktop processor while EPYC 7702P is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Quad Q8200 and EPYC 7702P, 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 Core 2 Quad Q8200
Core 2 Quad Q8200
AMD EPYC 7702P
EPYC 7702P

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.


3.8 522 votes

Rate Core 2 Quad Q8200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.9 32 votes

Rate EPYC 7702P on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core 2 Quad Q8200 or EPYC 7702P, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.