EPYC 7662 vs A8-3500M
Aggregate performance score
EPYC 7662 outperforms A8-3500M by a whopping 5108% 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 | 2782 | 68 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Server |
| Series | AMD A-Series | AMD EPYC |
| Power efficiency | 0.95 | 7.73 |
| Designer | AMD | AMD |
| Architecture codename | Llano (2011−2012) | Zen 2 (2017−2020) |
| Release date | 14 June 2011 (14 years ago) | 19 February 2020 (5 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
A8-3500M and EPYC 7662 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) | 64 (Tetrahexaconta-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 128 |
| Base clock speed | 1.5 GHz | 2 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.4 GHz | 3.3 GHz |
| Multiplier | no data | 20 |
| L1 cache | 128 KB (per core) | 4 MB |
| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 32 MB |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 256 MB |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 7 nm, 14 nm |
| Die size | 228 mm2 | no data |
| Number of transistors | 1,178 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on A8-3500M and EPYC 7662 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 | no data |
| Socket | FS1 | Socket SP3 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 225 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A8-3500M and EPYC 7662. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | 3DNow!, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4a, Radeon HD 6620G | no data |
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| Precision Boost 2 | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A8-3500M and EPYC 7662 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A8-3500M and EPYC 7662. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR4-3200 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 4 TiB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 8 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 204.763 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | AMD Radeon HD 6620G (444 MHz) | no data |
Synthetic benchmark performance
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 | 0.79 | 41.14 |
| Recency | 14 June 2011 | 19 February 2020 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 64 |
| Threads | 4 | 128 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 225 Watt |
A8-3500M has 542.9% lower power consumption.
EPYC 7662, on the other hand, has a 5107.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, 1500% more physical cores and 3100% more threads, and a 357.1% more advanced lithography process.
The AMD EPYC 7662 is our recommended choice as it beats the AMD A8-3500M in performance tests.
Be aware that A8-3500M is a notebook processor while EPYC 7662 is a server/workstation one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
