Athlon XP-M 2500+ vs Ryzen Threadripper 3960X
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 170 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 15.69 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | AMD Ryzen Threadripper | no data |
| Power efficiency | 4.72 | no data |
| Designer | AMD | AMD |
| Manufacturer | TSMC | no data |
| Architecture codename | Matisse (2019−2020) | Barton (2001−2004) |
| Release date | 25 November 2019 (6 years ago) | January 2001 (25 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $1,399 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
Ryzen Threadripper 3960X and Athlon XP-M 2500+ 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 | 24 (Tetracosa-Core) | 1 (Single-Core) |
| Threads | 48 | 1 |
| Base clock speed | 3.8 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 4.5 GHz | 1.86 GHz |
| Bus rate | 8 × 16 GT/s | no data |
| Multiplier | 38 | no data |
| L1 cache | 96K (per core) | 128 KB |
| L2 cache | 512K (per core) | 512 KB |
| L3 cache | 128 MB | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm, 12 nm | 130 nm |
| Die size | no data | 101 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 19,200 million | 63 million |
| 64 bit support | + | - |
| Windows 11 compatibility | + | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | + | - |
Compatibility
Information on Ryzen Threadripper 3960X and Athlon XP-M 2500+ 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 | TR4 | A |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 280 Watt | 45 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen Threadripper 3960X and Athlon XP-M 2500+. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | - |
| AVX | + | - |
| Precision Boost 2 | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen Threadripper 3960X and Athlon XP-M 2500+ are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen Threadripper 3960X and Athlon XP-M 2500+. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 Eight-channel | no data |
| Maximum memory size | 256 GB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 4 | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 102.403 GB/s | no data |
| ECC memory support | + | - |
Pros & cons summary
| Physical cores | 24 | 1 |
| Threads | 48 | 1 |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm | 130 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 280 Watt | 45 Watt |
Ryzen Threadripper 3960X has 2300% more physical cores and 4700% more threads, and a 1757.1% more advanced lithography process.
Athlon XP-M 2500+, on the other hand, has 522.2% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3960X and AMD Athlon XP-M 2500+. We've got no test results to judge.
Note that Ryzen Threadripper 3960X is a desktop processor while Athlon XP-M 2500+ 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.
