Atom x7809C vs Ryzen 5 9600X
Aggregate performance score
Ryzen 5 9600X outperforms Atom x7809C by a whopping 219% 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 | 424 | 1323 |
| Place by popularity | 41 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 53.73 | 31.98 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Power efficiency | 11.12 | 9.07 |
| Designer | AMD | Intel |
| Manufacturer | TSMC | Intel |
| Architecture codename | Granite Ridge (2024−2025) | Amston Lake (2024) |
| Release date | 8 August 2024 (1 year ago) | 8 April 2024 (1 year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $279 | $117 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Ryzen 5 9600X has 68% better value for money than Atom x7809C.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
Ryzen 5 9600X and Atom x7809C 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 | 6 (Hexa-Core) | 8 (Octa-Core) |
| Threads | 12 | 8 |
| Base clock speed | 3.9 GHz | 2 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 5.4 GHz | 3.6 GHz |
| L1 cache | 80 KB (per core) | 96 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 2 MB (per module) |
| L3 cache | 32 MB (shared) | 6 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 4 nm | 10 nm |
| Die size | 70.6 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | 95 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 8,315 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Unlocked multiplier | + | - |
Compatibility
Information on Ryzen 5 9600X and Atom x7809C 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 |
| Socket | AM5 | Intel BGA 1264 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 25 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 5 9600X and Atom x7809C. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | SMT, AES, AVX, AVX2, AVX512, FMA3, MMX (+), SHA, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, SSE4A | no data |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Precision Boost 2 | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 5 9600X and Atom x7809C are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 5 9600X and Atom x7809C. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR5 | DDR4, DDR5 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | AMD Radeon Graphics | N/A |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 5 9600X and Atom x7809C.
| PCIe version | 5.0 | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 24 | 9 |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 16.98 | 5.33 |
| Recency | 8 August 2024 | 8 April 2024 |
| Physical cores | 6 | 8 |
| Threads | 12 | 8 |
| Chip lithography | 4 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 25 Watt |
Ryzen 5 9600X has a 218.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 months, 50% more threads, and a 150% more advanced lithography process.
Atom x7809C, on the other hand, has 33.3% more physical cores, and 160% lower power consumption.
The AMD Ryzen 5 9600X is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Atom x7809C in performance tests.
Note that Ryzen 5 9600X is a desktop processor while Atom x7809C 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.
