EPYC 9174F vs A8-6410

VS

Aggregate performance score

A8-6410
2014
4 cores / 4 threads, 15 Watt
1.16
EPYC 9174F
2022
16 cores / 32 threads, 320 Watt
36.26
+3026%

EPYC 9174F outperforms A8-6410 by a whopping 3026% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A8-6410 and EPYC 9174F processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking2392104
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data6.69
Market segmentLaptopServer
SeriesAMD A-SeriesAMD EPYC
Power efficiency7.0510.33
Architecture codenameBeema (2014)Genoa (2022−2023)
Release date1 June 2014 (10 years ago)10 November 2022 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$3,850

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

A8-6410 and EPYC 9174F 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)16 (Hexadeca-Core)
Threads432
Base clock speed2 GHz4.1 GHz
Boost clock speed2.4 GHz4.1 GHz
Multiplierno data41
L1 cacheno data1 MB
L2 cache2048 KB16 MB
L3 cacheno data256 MB (shared)
Chip lithography28 nm5 nm, 6 nm
Die sizeno data8x 72 mm2
Maximum core temperature90 °Cno data
Number of transistors930 Million52,560 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data

Compatibility

Information on A8-6410 and EPYC 9174F 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 configurationno data2
SocketFT3bSP5
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt320 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A8-6410 and EPYC 9174F. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsMMX, SSE4.2, AES, AVX, BMI1, F16C, AMD64, VTno data
AES-NI++
FMAFMA4-
AVX++
PowerNow+-
PowerGating+-
VirusProtect+-
Precision Boost 2no data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A8-6410 and EPYC 9174F are enumerated here.

AMD-V++
IOMMU 2.0+-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A8-6410 and EPYC 9174F. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3L-1866DDR5-4800
Maximum memory sizeno data6 TiB
Max memory channels1no data
Maximum memory bandwidthno data460.8 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon R5 Graphicsno data
Enduro+-
Switchable graphics+-
UVD+-
VCE+-

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of A8-6410 and EPYC 9174F integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort+-
HDMI+-

Graphics API support

APIs supported by A8-6410 and EPYC 9174F integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXDirectX® 12no data
Vulkan+-

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A8-6410 and EPYC 9174F.

PCIe version2.05.0
PCI Express lanesno data128

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

A8-6410 1.16
EPYC 9174F 36.26
+3026%

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.

A8-6410 1772
EPYC 9174F 55485
+3031%

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

A8-6410 222
EPYC 9174F 2214
+897%

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

A8-6410 586
EPYC 9174F 16965
+2795%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.16 36.26
Recency 1 June 2014 10 November 2022
Physical cores 4 16
Threads 4 32
Chip lithography 28 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 320 Watt

A8-6410 has 2033.3% lower power consumption.

EPYC 9174F, on the other hand, has a 3025.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, 300% more physical cores and 700% more threads, and a 460% more advanced lithography process.

The EPYC 9174F is our recommended choice as it beats the A8-6410 in performance tests.

Be aware that A8-6410 is a notebook processor while EPYC 9174F is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between A8-6410 and EPYC 9174F, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


AMD A8-6410
A8-6410
AMD EPYC 9174F
EPYC 9174F

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.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


3.6 322 votes

Rate A8-6410 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.7 3 votes

Rate EPYC 9174F on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A8-6410 or EPYC 9174F, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.