C-60 vs EPYC 9754
Aggregate performance score
EPYC 9754 outperforms C-60 by a whopping 31122% 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 | 31 | 3456 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 1.16 | no data |
| Market segment | Server | Laptop |
| Series | no data | AMD C-Series |
| Power efficiency | 6.60 | 0.85 |
| Designer | AMD | AMD |
| Manufacturer | TSMC | no data |
| Architecture codename | Bergamo (2023) | Ontario (2011−2012) |
| Release date | 13 June 2023 (2 years ago) | 22 August 2011 (14 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $11,900 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
EPYC 9754 and C-60 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 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | 2.25 GHz | 1 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.1 GHz | 1.33 GHz |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 64K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 512K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 256 MB (shared) | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 40 nm |
| Die size | 8x 73 mm2 | 75 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 71,000 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | no data | - |
Compatibility
Information on EPYC 9754 and C-60 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 | FT1 BGA 413-Ball |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 360 Watt | 9 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 9754 and C-60. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | MMX(+), SSE(1,2,3,3S,4A), AMD-V, Radeon HD 6290 (276-400 MHz) |
| AES-NI | + | - |
| AVX | + | - |
| Precision Boost 2 | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by EPYC 9754 and C-60 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by EPYC 9754 and C-60. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR5 | DDR3 Single-channel |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | N/A | AMD Radeon HD 6290 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by EPYC 9754 and C-60.
| 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 | 56.20 | 0.18 |
| Recency | 13 June 2023 | 22 August 2011 |
| Physical cores | 128 | 2 |
| Threads | 256 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 360 Watt | 9 Watt |
EPYC 9754 has a 31122.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, 6300% more physical cores and 12700% more threads, and a 700% more advanced lithography process.
C-60, on the other hand, has 3900% lower power consumption.
The AMD EPYC 9754 is our recommended choice as it beats the AMD C-60 in performance tests.
Be aware that EPYC 9754 is a server/workstation processor while C-60 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.
