Atom C3508 vs Opteron 840
Primary details
Comparing Opteron 840 and Atom C3508 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | 2356 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Server | Server |
| Series | no data | Intel Atom |
| Power efficiency | no data | 9.54 |
| Architecture codename | SledgeHammer (2003−2005) | Goldmont (2016−2017) |
| Release date | September 2003 (21 year ago) | 15 August 2017 (7 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Opteron 840 and Atom C3508 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 | 1 (Single-Core) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 1 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 1.6 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.4 GHz | 1.6 GHz |
| Multiplier | no data | 16 |
| L1 cache | 128 KB | 224 KB |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 8 MB |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 8 MB |
| Chip lithography | 130 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 193 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 90 °C |
| Number of transistors | 106 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Opteron 840 and Atom C3508 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 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | 940 | FCBGA1310 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 85 Watt | 11.5 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Opteron 840 and Atom C3508. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| QuickAssist | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | - |
| Status | no data | Launched |
Security technologies
Opteron 840 and Atom C3508 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| EDB | no data | + |
| Secure Boot | no data | + |
| Secure Key | no data | + |
| SGX | no data | - |
| OS Guard | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Opteron 840 and Atom C3508 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
| EPT | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Opteron 840 and Atom C3508. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR4: 1866 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 256 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 29.871 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Opteron 840 and Atom C3508.
| PCIe version | no data | 3 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 8 |
| USB revision | no data | 3 |
| Total number of SATA ports | no data | 8 |
| Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Ports | no data | 8 |
| Number of USB ports | no data | 8 |
| Integrated LAN | no data | 4x2.5/1 GBE |
Pros & cons summary
| Physical cores | 1 | 4 |
| Threads | 1 | 4 |
| Chip lithography | 130 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 85 Watt | 11 Watt |
Atom C3508 has 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads, a 828.6% more advanced lithography process, and 672.7% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Opteron 840 and Atom C3508. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Opteron 840 and Atom C3508, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
