Atom x7809C vs Xeon Silver 4112
Aggregate performance score
Atom x7809C outperforms Xeon Silver 4112 by a considerable 44% 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 | 1643 | 1338 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.44 | 31.98 |
| Market segment | Server | Laptop |
| Series | Intel Xeon Silver | no data |
| Power efficiency | 4.68 | 22.90 |
| Designer | Intel | Intel |
| Manufacturer | no data | Intel |
| Architecture codename | Skylake (server) (2017−2018) | Amston Lake (2024−2025) |
| Release date | 11 July 2017 (8 years ago) | 8 April 2024 (1 year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $473 | $117 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Atom x7809C has 7168% better value for money than Xeon Silver 4112.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
Xeon Silver 4112 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 | 4 (Quad-Core) | 8 (Octa-Core) |
| Threads | 8 | 8 |
| Base clock speed | 2.6 GHz | 2 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3 GHz | 3.6 GHz |
| Multiplier | 26 | no data |
| L1 cache | 256 KB | 96 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 4 MB | 2 MB (per module) |
| L3 cache | 8.25 MB | 6 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 10 nm |
| Maximum core temperature | 76 °C | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | + | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Xeon Silver 4112 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 | 2 (Multiprocessor) | 1 |
| Socket | FCLGA3647 | Intel BGA 1264 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 85 Watt | 25 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon Silver 4112 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 |
Security technologies
Xeon Silver 4112 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 Silver 4112 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 Silver 4112 and Atom x7809C. 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 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 115.212 GB/s | 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 Silver 4112 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 | 3.71 | 5.34 |
| Recency | 11 July 2017 | 8 April 2024 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 8 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 85 Watt | 25 Watt |
Atom x7809C has a 43.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, 100% more physical cores, a 40% more advanced lithography process, and 240% lower power consumption.
The Intel Atom x7809C is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Xeon Silver 4112 in performance tests.
Be aware that Xeon Silver 4112 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.
