Atom x7405C vs Xeon Gold 6122
Primary details
Comparing Xeon Gold 6122 and Atom x7405C processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 450 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Server | Laptop |
| Architecture codename | no data | Amston Lake (2024) |
| Release date | 1 April 2018 (6 years ago) | 8 April 2024 (less than a year ago) |
Detailed specifications
Xeon Gold 6122 and Atom x7405C 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 | 20 (Icosa-Core) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 40 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 1.8 GHz | 1.7 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.7 GHz | 3.4 GHz |
| L1 cache | no data | 96 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | no data | 2 MB (shared) |
| L3 cache | 28 MB | 6 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 10 nm |
| 64 bit support | - | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Xeon Gold 6122 and Atom x7405C 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 | FCLGA3647 | Intel BGA 1264 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 120 Watt | 12 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon Gold 6122 and Atom x7405C. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® AVX-512 | no data |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| vPro | + | no data |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Speed Shift | + | no data |
| Turbo Boost Technology | 2.0 | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | + | no data |
| TSX | + | - |
| Turbo Boost Max 3.0 | - | no data |
| Status | Launched | no data |
Security technologies
Xeon Gold 6122 and Atom x7405C technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon Gold 6122 and Atom x7405C are enumerated here.
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon Gold 6122 and Atom x7405C. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4-2400 | DDR4, DDR5 |
| Maximum memory size | 768 GB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 6 | no data |
| ECC memory support | + | - |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | N/A |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon Gold 6122 and Atom x7405C.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 48 | 9 |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 1 April 2018 | 8 April 2024 |
| Physical cores | 20 | 4 |
| Threads | 40 | 4 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 120 Watt | 12 Watt |
Xeon Gold 6122 has 400% more physical cores and 900% more threads.
Atom x7405C, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 6 years, a 40% more advanced lithography process, and 900% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Xeon Gold 6122 and Atom x7405C. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that Xeon Gold 6122 is a server/workstation processor while Atom x7405C is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon Gold 6122 and Atom x7405C, 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.
