Atom N2600 vs EPYC 9754
Aggregate performance score
EPYC 9754 outperforms Atom N2600 by a whopping 31145% 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 | 16 | 3305 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 1.10 | no data |
| Market segment | Server | Laptop |
| Series | no data | Intel Atom |
| Power efficiency | 16.61 | 4.78 |
| Designer | AMD | Intel |
| Manufacturer | TSMC | Intel |
| Architecture codename | Bergamo (2023) | Cedarview-M (2011−2012) |
| Release date | 13 June 2023 (1 year ago) | 1 December 2011 (13 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $11,900 | $47 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
EPYC 9754 and Atom N2600 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 | 128 | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 256 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 2.25 GHz | 1.6 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.1 GHz | 1.6 GHz |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 64 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 512K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 256 MB (shared) | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 32 nm |
| Die size | 8x 73 mm2 | 66 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 71,000 million | 176 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | no data | - |
Compatibility
Information on EPYC 9754 and Atom N2600 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 | SP5 | FCBGA559 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 360 Watt | 3.5 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 9754 and Atom N2600. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | Intel® SSE2, Intel® SSE3, Intel® SSSE3 |
| AES-NI | + | - |
| AVX | + | - |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | - | + |
| Demand Based Switching | no data | - |
| Precision Boost 2 | + | no data |
Security technologies
EPYC 9754 and Atom N2600 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | - |
| EDB | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by EPYC 9754 and Atom N2600 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 9754 and Atom N2600. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR5 | DDR3 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 2.44 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 1 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | N/A | Intel Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 3600 (400 MHz) |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by EPYC 9754 and Atom N2600.
| PCIe version | 5.0 | no data |
| PCI Express lanes | 128 | no data |
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.
GeekBench 5 Single-Core
GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 62.49 | 0.20 |
| Recency | 13 June 2023 | 1 December 2011 |
| Physical cores | 128 | 2 |
| Threads | 256 | 4 |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 32 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 360 Watt | 3 Watt |
EPYC 9754 has a 31145% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, 6300% more physical cores and 6300% more threads, and a 540% more advanced lithography process.
Atom N2600, on the other hand, has 11900% lower power consumption.
The AMD EPYC 9754 is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Atom N2600 in performance tests.
Be aware that EPYC 9754 is a server/workstation processor while Atom N2600 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.
