A9-9410 vs EPYC 7C13

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

EPYC 7C13
2021
64 cores / 128 threads, 225 Watt
43.29
+4819%

EPYC 7C13 outperforms A9-9410 by a whopping 4819% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking692782
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentServerLaptop
Seriesno dataAMD Bristol Ridge
Power efficiency20.646.29
DesignerAMDAMD
ManufacturerTSMCGlobalFoundries
Architecture codenameMilan (2021−2023)Stoney Ridge (2016−2019)
Release date2021 (4 years ago)31 May 2016 (9 years ago)

Detailed specifications

EPYC 7C13 and A9-9410 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 cores64 (Tetrahexaconta-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads1282
Base clock speed2 GHz2.9 GHz
Boost clock speed3.68 GHz3.5 GHz
L1 cache64 KB (per core)no data
L2 cache512 KB (per core)2048 KB
L3 cache256 MB (shared)0 KB
Chip lithography7 nm28 nm
Die size8x 81 mm2125 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data90 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data74 °C
Number of transistors33,200 million1,200 million
64 bit support-+
Windows 11 compatibilityno data-

Compatibility

Information on EPYC 7C13 and A9-9410 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 configuration21
SocketSP3FP4
Power consumption (TDP)225 Watt15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 7C13 and A9-9410. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataVirtualization,
AES-NI++
FMA-+
AVX++
FRTC-+
FreeSync-+
Precision Boost 2+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by EPYC 7C13 and A9-9410 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by EPYC 7C13 and A9-9410. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4DDR4-2133
Max memory channelsno data1

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardN/AAMD Radeon R5 Graphics
iGPU core countno data3
Enduro-+
Switchable graphics-+
UVD-+
VCE-+

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of EPYC 7C13 and A9-9410 integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort-+
HDMI-+

Graphics API support

APIs supported by EPYC 7C13 and A9-9410 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno dataDirectX® 12
Vulkan-+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by EPYC 7C13 and A9-9410.

PCIe version4.03.0
PCI Express lanes1288

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 7C13 43.29
+4819%
A9-9410 0.88

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 7C13 76363
+4833%
Samples: 54
A9-9410 1548
Samples: 321

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 43.29 0.88
Physical cores 64 2
Threads 128 2
Chip lithography 7 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 225 Watt 15 Watt

EPYC 7C13 has a 4819.3% higher aggregate performance score, 3100% more physical cores and 6300% more threads, and a 300% more advanced lithography process.

A9-9410, on the other hand, has 1400% lower power consumption.

The AMD EPYC 7C13 is our recommended choice as it beats the AMD A9-9410 in performance tests.

Be aware that EPYC 7C13 is a server/workstation processor while A9-9410 is a notebook one.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


AMD EPYC 7C13
EPYC 7C13
AMD A9-9410
A9-9410

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.


5 1 vote

Rate EPYC 7C13 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 135 votes

Rate A9-9410 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about processors EPYC 7C13 and A9-9410, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report bugs or inaccuracies on the site.