EPYC 9335 vs FX-8100

VS

Primary details

Comparing FX-8100 and EPYC 9335 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking1734not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorServer
Power efficiency2.54no data
Architecture codenameZambezi (2011−2012)Turin (2024)
Release date12 October 2011 (13 years ago)10 October 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$3,178

Detailed specifications

FX-8100 and EPYC 9335 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 cores8 (Octa-Core)32 (Dotriaconta-Core)
Threads864
Base clock speed2.8 GHz3 GHz
Boost clock speed3.7 GHz4.4 GHz
L1 cache384 KB80 KB (per core)
L2 cache8 MB1 MB (per core)
L3 cache8 MB (shared)128 MB (shared)
Chip lithography32 nm4 nm
Die size315 mm24x 70.6 mm2
Number of transistors1,200 million33,260 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data
Unlocked multiplier+-

Compatibility

Information on FX-8100 and EPYC 9335 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 configuration12
SocketAM3+SP5
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt210 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-8100 and EPYC 9335. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI++
FMA+-
AVX++
Precision Boost 2no data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by FX-8100 and EPYC 9335 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-8100 and EPYC 9335. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR5

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataN/A

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FX-8100 and EPYC 9335.

PCIe version2.05.0
PCI Express lanesno data128

Pros & cons summary


Recency 12 October 2011 10 October 2024
Physical cores 8 32
Threads 8 64
Chip lithography 32 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 210 Watt

FX-8100 has 121.1% lower power consumption.

EPYC 9335, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 12 years, 300% more physical cores and 700% more threads, and a 700% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between FX-8100 and EPYC 9335. We've got no test results to judge.

Note that FX-8100 is a desktop processor while EPYC 9335 is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between FX-8100 and EPYC 9335, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

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 FX-8100
FX-8100
AMD EPYC 9335
EPYC 9335

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


3.7 63 votes

Rate FX-8100 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate EPYC 9335 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about FX-8100 or EPYC 9335, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.