Atom x7809C vs Xeon Platinum 8260
Aggregate performance score
Xeon Platinum 8260 outperforms Atom x7809C by a whopping 224% 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 | 435 | 1366 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 1.37 | 31.97 |
| Market segment | Server | Laptop |
| Series | Intel Xeon Platinum | no data |
| Power efficiency | 4.45 | 9.07 |
| Designer | Intel | Intel |
| Manufacturer | Intel | Intel |
| Architecture codename | Cascade Lake-SP (2018) | Amston Lake (2024−2025) |
| Release date | 11 December 2018 (7 years ago) | 8 April 2024 (1 year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $4,702 | $117 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Atom x7809C has 2234% better value for money than Xeon Platinum 8260.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
Xeon Platinum 8260 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 | 24 (Tetracosa-Core) | 8 (Octa-Core) |
| Threads | 48 | 8 |
| Base clock speed | 2.4 GHz | 2 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.9 GHz | 3.6 GHz |
| Multiplier | 24 | no data |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 96 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 2 MB (per module) |
| L3 cache | 35.75 MB (shared) | 6 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 10 nm |
| Maximum core temperature | 90 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 8,000 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | + | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Xeon Platinum 8260 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 | 8 (Multiprocessor) | 1 |
| Socket | FCLGA3647 | Intel BGA 1264 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 165 Watt | 25 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon Platinum 8260 and Atom x7809C. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512 | no data |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| vPro | + | no data |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| Speed Shift | + | no data |
| Turbo Boost Technology | 2.0 | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | + | no data |
| TSX | + | - |
| Turbo Boost Max 3.0 | - | no data |
| Deep Learning Boost | + | - |
Security technologies
Xeon Platinum 8260 and Atom x7809C 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 Platinum 8260 and Atom x7809C are enumerated here.
| VT-d | + | + |
| VT-x | + | + |
| EPT | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon Platinum 8260 and Atom x7809C. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4-2933 | DDR4, DDR5 |
| Maximum memory size | 1 TB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 6 | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 140.8 GB/s | no data |
| ECC memory support | + | - |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | N/A | N/A |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon Platinum 8260 and Atom x7809C.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 48 | 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 | 17.38 | 5.37 |
| Recency | 11 December 2018 | 8 April 2024 |
| Physical cores | 24 | 8 |
| Threads | 48 | 8 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 165 Watt | 25 Watt |
Xeon Platinum 8260 has a 223.6% higher aggregate performance score, and 200% more physical cores and 500% more threads.
Atom x7809C, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 5 years, a 40% more advanced lithography process, and 560% lower power consumption.
The Intel Xeon Platinum 8260 is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Atom x7809C in performance tests.
Be aware that Xeon Platinum 8260 is a server/workstation 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.
