Atom x7809C vs Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495
Aggregate performance score
Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 outperforms Atom x7809C by a whopping 497% 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 | 188 | 1472 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 18.97 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Power efficiency | 24.74 | 9.11 |
| Designer | AMD | Intel |
| Manufacturer | TSMC | Intel |
| Architecture codename | Gorgon Halo (2026) | Amston Lake (2024−2025) |
| Release date | 20 May 2026 (less than a year ago) | 8 April 2024 (2 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $117 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Performance to price scatter graph
Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.
Detailed specifications
Basic parameters of Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 and Atom x7809C: 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 | 16 (Hexadeca-Core) | 8 (Octa-Core) |
| Threads | 32 | 8 |
| Base clock speed | 3.1 GHz | 2 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 5.2 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 | 64 MB | 6 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 4 nm | 10 nm |
| Die size | 2x 70.6 mm2 | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
Compatibility
Information on Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 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 | FP11 | Intel BGA 1264 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 55 Watt | 25 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 and Atom x7809C. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | USB 4, XDNA 2 NPU (50 TOPS), 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 AI Max+ PRO 495 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 AI Max+ PRO 495 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 8065S | N/A |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 and Atom x7809C.
| PCIe version | 4.0 | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 16 | 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 | 32.85 | 5.50 |
| Recency | 20 May 2026 | 8 April 2024 |
| Physical cores | 16 | 8 |
| Threads | 32 | 8 |
| Chip lithography | 4 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 55 Watt | 25 Watt |
Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 has a 497% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, 100% more physical cores and 300% more threads, and a 150% more advanced lithography process.
Atom x7809C, on the other hand, has 120% lower power consumption.
The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Atom x7809C in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
