Atom x7809C vs EPYC 7513
Aggregate performance score
EPYC 7513 outperforms Atom x7809C by a whopping 525% 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 | 145 | 1381 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 10.56 | 32.00 |
| Market segment | Server | Laptop |
| Series | AMD EPYC | no data |
| Power efficiency | 7.10 | 9.08 |
| Designer | AMD | Intel |
| Manufacturer | TSMC | Intel |
| Architecture codename | Milan (2021−2023) | Amston Lake (2024−2025) |
| Release date | 12 January 2021 (5 years ago) | 8 April 2024 (2 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $2,840 | $117 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Atom x7809C has 203% better value for money than EPYC 7513.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
Basic parameters of EPYC 7513 and Atom x7809C: 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 | 32 (Dotriaconta-Core) | 8 (Octa-Core) |
| Threads | 64 | 8 |
| Base clock speed | 2.6 GHz | 2 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.65 GHz | 3.6 GHz |
| Multiplier | 26 | no data |
| L1 cache | 2 MB | 96 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 16 MB | 2 MB (per module) |
| L3 cache | 128 MB (shared) | 6 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm+ | 10 nm |
| Die size | 8x 81 mm2 | no data |
| Number of transistors | 33,200 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | + | no data |
Compatibility
Information on EPYC 7513 and Atom x7809C 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 | 2 | 1 |
| Socket | SP3 | Intel BGA 1264 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 200 Watt | 25 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 7513 and Atom x7809C. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by EPYC 7513 and Atom x7809C are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by EPYC 7513 and Atom x7809C. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4-3200 | DDR4, DDR5 |
| Maximum memory size | 4 TiB | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 204.795 GB/s | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | N/A | N/A |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by EPYC 7513 and Atom x7809C.
| PCIe version | 4.0 | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 128 | 9 |
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.
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 | 33.64 | 5.38 |
| Recency | 12 January 2021 | 8 April 2024 |
| Physical cores | 32 | 8 |
| Threads | 64 | 8 |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 200 Watt | 25 Watt |
EPYC 7513 has a 525% higher aggregate performance score, 300% more physical cores and 700% more threads, and a 43% more advanced lithography process.
Atom x7809C, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, and 700% lower power consumption.
The AMD EPYC 7513 is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Atom x7809C in performance tests.
Be aware that EPYC 7513 is a server/workstation processor while Atom x7809C is a notebook one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
