Athlon X4 970 vs EPYC 7301

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

EPYC 7301
2017, $825
16 cores / 32 threads, 170 Watt
8.57
+468%

EPYC 7301 outperforms Athlon X4 970 by a whopping 468% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking10492385
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.36no data
Market segmentServerDesktop processor
SeriesAMD EPYCno data
Power efficiency2.130.98
DesignerAMDAMD
Architecture codenameNaples (2017−2018)Bristol Ridge (2016−2019)
Release date29 June 2017 (8 years ago)27 July 2017 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$825no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

Detailed specifications

EPYC 7301 and Athlon X4 970 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 cores16 (Hexadeca-Core)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads324
Base clock speed2.2 GHz3.8 GHz
Boost clock speed2.7 GHz4 GHz
Multiplier22no data
L1 cache96K (per core)128 KB (per core)
L2 cache512K (per core)512 KB (per core)
L3 cache64 MB (shared)0 KB
Chip lithography14 nm28 nm
Die size192 mm2246 mm2
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data74 °C
Number of transistors4,800 million1,178 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplier++

Compatibility

Information on EPYC 7301 and Athlon X4 970 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 configuration2 (Multiprocessor)1
SocketTR4AM4
Power consumption (TDP)170 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 7301 and Athlon X4 970. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI++
FMA-+
AVX++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by EPYC 7301 and Athlon X4 970 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by EPYC 7301 and Athlon X4 970. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4 Eight-channelDDR4 Dual-channel
Maximum memory size2 TiBno data
Max memory channels8no data
Maximum memory bandwidth170.671 GB/sno data
ECC memory support+-

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by EPYC 7301 and Athlon X4 970.

PCIe version3.0no data
PCI Express lanes128no 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.

EPYC 7301 8.57
+468%
Athlon X4 970 1.51

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.

EPYC 7301 14991
+467%
Samples: 2
Athlon X4 970 2644
Samples: 7

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 8.57 1.51
Physical cores 16 4
Threads 32 4
Chip lithography 14 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 170 Watt 65 Watt

EPYC 7301 has a 468% higher aggregate performance score, 300% more physical cores and 700% more threads, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

Athlon X4 970, on the other hand, has 162% lower power consumption.

The AMD EPYC 7301 is our recommended choice as it beats the AMD Athlon X4 970 in performance tests.

Be aware that EPYC 7301 is a server/workstation processor while Athlon X4 970 is a desktop one.

Other comparisons

We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


2.7 22 votes

Rate EPYC 7301 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 133 votes

Rate Athlon X4 970 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about processors EPYC 7301 and Athlon X4 970, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report bugs or inaccuracies on the site.