Atom C3808 vs EPYC 4565P
Aggregate performance score
EPYC 4565P outperforms Atom C3808 by a whopping 1025% 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 | 80 | 1660 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 70.89 | 0.65 |
| Market segment | Server | Server |
| Series | no data | Intel Atom |
| Power efficiency | 22.54 | 13.62 |
| Designer | AMD | Intel |
| Manufacturer | TSMC | no data |
| Architecture codename | Grado (2025) | Goldmont (2016−2017) |
| Release date | 13 May 2025 (recently) | 15 August 2017 (7 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $589 | $369 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
EPYC 4565P has 10806% better value for money than Atom C3808.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
EPYC 4565P and Atom C3808 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 | 16 (Hexadeca-Core) | 12 (Dodeca-Core) |
| Threads | 32 | 12 |
| Base clock speed | 4.3 GHz | 2 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 5.7 GHz | 2 GHz |
| Multiplier | no data | 22 |
| L1 cache | 80 KB (per core) | 672 KB |
| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 12 MB |
| L3 cache | 64 MB (shared) | 12 MB |
| Chip lithography | 4 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 2x 70.6 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 86 °C |
| Number of transistors | 16,630 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | no data | - |
Compatibility
Information on EPYC 4565P and Atom C3808 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 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | AM5 | FCBGA1310 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 170 Watt | 25 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 4565P and Atom C3808. 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 2 | + | no data |
Security technologies
EPYC 4565P and Atom C3808 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 EPYC 4565P and Atom C3808 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 EPYC 4565P and Atom C3808. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR5 | DDR4: 2133 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 256 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 34.134 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | AMD Radeon Graphics | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by EPYC 4565P and Atom C3808.
| PCIe version | 5.0 | 3 |
| PCI Express lanes | 24 | 16 |
| USB revision | no data | 3 |
| Total number of SATA ports | no data | 16 |
| Number of USB ports | no data | 8 |
| Integrated LAN | no data | 4x10/2.5/1 GBE |
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 | 39.73 | 3.53 |
| Recency | 13 May 2025 | 15 August 2017 |
| Physical cores | 16 | 12 |
| Threads | 32 | 12 |
| Chip lithography | 4 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 170 Watt | 25 Watt |
EPYC 4565P has a 1025.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, 33.3% more physical cores and 166.7% more threads, and a 250% more advanced lithography process.
Atom C3808, on the other hand, has 580% lower power consumption.
The AMD EPYC 4565P is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Atom C3808 in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
