EPYC Embedded 8434P vs Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G
Primary details
Comparing Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G and EPYC Embedded 8434P processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 1359 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Server |
| Series | AMD Ryzen 3 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 6.25 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Zen (2017−2020) | Siena (2023−2024) |
| Release date | 10 May 2018 (6 years ago) | 1 October 2024 (less than a year ago) |
Detailed specifications
Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G and EPYC Embedded 8434P 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 | 4 (Quad-Core) | 48 (Octatetraconta-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 96 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 2.5 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.5 GHz | 3.1 GHz |
| Multiplier | 35 | no data |
| L1 cache | 384 KB | 64 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 2 MB | 1 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 4 MB | 128 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 5 nm |
| Die size | 209.78 mm2 | 4x 73 mm2 |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 75 °C |
| Number of transistors | 4950 Million | 35,500 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G and EPYC Embedded 8434P 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 (Uniprocessor) | 1 |
| Socket | Socket AM4 | SP6 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 200 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G and EPYC Embedded 8434P. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| Precision Boost 2 | + | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G and EPYC Embedded 8434P are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G and EPYC Embedded 8434P. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4-2933 | DDR5 |
| Maximum memory size | 64 GB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 2 | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 46.933 GB/s | no data |
| ECC memory support | + | - |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | AMD Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) | N/A |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G and EPYC Embedded 8434P.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | 5.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 12 | 96 |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 10 May 2018 | 1 October 2024 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 48 |
| Threads | 4 | 96 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 200 Watt |
Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G has 207.7% lower power consumption.
EPYC Embedded 8434P, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 6 years, 1100% more physical cores and 2300% more threads, and a 180% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G and EPYC Embedded 8434P. We've got no test results to judge.
Note that Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G is a desktop processor while EPYC Embedded 8434P is a server/workstation one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 3 PRO 2200G and EPYC Embedded 8434P, 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.
