Atom x7211E vs EPYC 8434P
Aggregate performance score
EPYC 8434P outperforms Atom x7211E by a whopping 2509% 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 | 92 | 2333 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 14.38 | no data |
| Market segment | Server | Laptop |
| Power efficiency | 7.99 | 10.21 |
| Designer | AMD | Intel |
| Manufacturer | TSMC | Intel |
| Architecture codename | Siena (2023−2024) | Gracemont (2023) |
| Release date | 18 September 2023 (2 years ago) | 3 January 2023 (2 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $2,700 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
EPYC 8434P and Atom x7211E 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 | 48 (Octatetraconta-Core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 96 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | 2.5 GHz | 1 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.1 GHz | 3.2 GHz |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 96K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 2 MB (shared) |
| L3 cache | 128 MB (shared) | 6 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 10 nm |
| Die size | 4x 73 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 75 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 35,500 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
Compatibility
Information on EPYC 8434P and Atom x7211E 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 |
| Socket | SP6 | Intel BGA 1744 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 200 Watt | 6 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 8434P and Atom x7211E. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Precision Boost 2 | + | no data |
Security technologies
EPYC 8434P and Atom x7211E technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by EPYC 8434P and Atom x7211E 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 8434P and Atom x7211E. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR5 | DDR4, DDR5 4800 MHz Single-channel |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | N/A | Intel UHD Graphics 16EU |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by EPYC 8434P and Atom x7211E.
| PCIe version | 5.0 | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 96 | 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 | 37.83 | 1.45 |
| Recency | 18 September 2023 | 3 January 2023 |
| Physical cores | 48 | 2 |
| Threads | 96 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 200 Watt | 6 Watt |
EPYC 8434P has a 2509% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 months, 2300% more physical cores and 4700% more threads, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.
Atom x7211E, on the other hand, has 3233.3% lower power consumption.
The AMD EPYC 8434P is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Atom x7211E in performance tests.
Be aware that EPYC 8434P is a server/workstation processor while Atom x7211E 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.
