EPYC 9654 vs PRO A12-8870E

VS

Aggregate performance score

PRO A12-8870E
2016
4 cores / 4 threads, 35 Watt
1.90
EPYC 9654
2022
96 cores / 192 threads, 360 Watt
75.73
+3886%

EPYC 9654 outperforms PRO A12-8870E by a whopping 3886% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing PRO A12-8870E and EPYC 9654 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking19606
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data1.29
Market segmentDesktop processorServer
Seriesno dataAMD EPYC
Power efficiency5.1419.91
Architecture codenameCarrizo (2015−2018)Genoa (2022−2023)
Release dateOctober 2016 (8 years ago)10 November 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$11,805

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

PRO A12-8870E and EPYC 9654 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)96
Threads4192
Base clock speed2.9 GHz2.4 GHz
Boost clock speed3.8 GHz3.7 GHz
Multiplierno data24
L1 cacheno data64K (per core)
L2 cache2048 KB1 MB (per core)
L3 cacheno data384 MB (shared)
Chip lithography28 nm5 nm, 6 nm
Die size250 mm212x 72 mm2
Number of transistors3,100 million78,840 million
64 bit support++

Compatibility

Information on PRO A12-8870E and EPYC 9654 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
SocketAM4SP5
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt360 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by PRO A12-8870E and EPYC 9654. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

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

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by PRO A12-8870E and EPYC 9654 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by PRO A12-8870E and EPYC 9654. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-2400DDR5-4800
Maximum memory sizeno data6 TiB
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidthno data460.8 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon R7 Graphicsno data
iGPU core count8no data
Enduron/a-
Switchable graphics+-

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of PRO A12-8870E and EPYC 9654 integrated GPUs.

DisplayPortn/a-

Graphics API support

APIs supported by PRO A12-8870E and EPYC 9654 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXDirectX® 12no data
Vulkan+-

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by PRO A12-8870E and EPYC 9654.

PCIe version3.05.0
PCI Express lanesno data128

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

PRO A12-8870E 1.90
EPYC 9654 75.73
+3886%

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.

PRO A12-8870E 3023
EPYC 9654 120295
+3879%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.90 75.73
Physical cores 4 96
Threads 4 192
Chip lithography 28 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 360 Watt

PRO A12-8870E has 928.6% lower power consumption.

EPYC 9654, on the other hand, has a 3885.8% higher aggregate performance score, 2300% more physical cores and 4700% more threads, and a 460% more advanced lithography process.

The EPYC 9654 is our recommended choice as it beats the PRO A12-8870E in performance tests.

Note that PRO A12-8870E is a desktop processor while EPYC 9654 is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between PRO A12-8870E and EPYC 9654, 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 PRO A12-8870E
PRO A12-8870E
AMD EPYC 9654
EPYC 9654

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.


2.5 8 votes

Rate PRO A12-8870E on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 992 votes

Rate EPYC 9654 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about PRO A12-8870E or EPYC 9654, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.