Ryzen Embedded 8840U vs Xeon E7210
Primary details
Comparing Xeon E7210 and Ryzen Embedded 8840U processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Server | Laptop |
| Architecture codename | no data | Hawk Point (2024) |
| Release date | 1 July 2007 (17 years ago) | 2 April 2024 (less than a year ago) |
Detailed specifications
Xeon E7210 and Ryzen Embedded 8840U 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 | no data | 8 (Octa-Core) |
| Threads | no data | 16 |
| Base clock speed | 2.4 GHz | 3.3 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 5.1 GHz |
| L1 cache | no data | 64 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | no data | 1 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 8 MB L2 Cache | 16 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 4 nm |
| Die size | no data | 178 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 64 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | no data | 25,000 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | no data |
| VID voltage range | 1.0V-1.5V | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Xeon E7210 and Ryzen Embedded 8840U 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 | no data | 1 |
| Socket | PPGA604 | FP8 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 80 Watt | 28 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon E7210 and Ryzen Embedded 8840U. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | no data |
| Idle States | + | no data |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | - |
| Demand Based Switching | + | no data |
| FSB parity | + | no data |
| Precision Boost 2 | no data | + |
Security technologies
Xeon E7210 and Ryzen Embedded 8840U technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | - | no data |
| EDB | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon E7210 and Ryzen Embedded 8840U are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
| VT-x | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon E7210 and Ryzen Embedded 8840U. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR5 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | AMD Radeon 780M |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon E7210 and Ryzen Embedded 8840U.
| PCIe version | no data | 4.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 20 |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 1 July 2007 | 2 April 2024 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 4 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 80 Watt | 28 Watt |
Ryzen Embedded 8840U has an age advantage of 16 years, a 1525% more advanced lithography process, and 185.7% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Xeon E7210 and Ryzen Embedded 8840U. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that Xeon E7210 is a server/workstation processor while Ryzen Embedded 8840U is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon E7210 and Ryzen Embedded 8840U, 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.
