EPYC 7502P vs A9-9420

VS

Aggregate performance score

A9-9420
2016
2 cores / 2 threads, 15 Watt
0.94
EPYC 7502P
2019
32 cores / 64 threads, 180 Watt
32.06
+3311%

EPYC 7502P outperforms A9-9420 by a whopping 3311% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A9-9420 and EPYC 7502P processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking2523127
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data9.57
Market segmentLaptopServer
SeriesAMD Bristol RidgeAMD EPYC
Power efficiency5.9316.85
Architecture codenameStoney Ridge (2016−2019)Zen 2 (2017−2020)
Release date31 May 2016 (8 years ago)7 August 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$2,300

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

A9-9420 and EPYC 7502P 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 cores2 (Dual-core)32 (Dotriaconta-Core)
Threads264
Base clock speed3 GHz2.5 GHz
Boost clock speed3.6 GHz3.35 GHz
Multiplierno data25
L1 cache160 KB96K (per core)
L2 cache1 MB (shared)512K (per core)
L3 cache0 KB128 MB (shared)
Chip lithography28 nm7 nm, 14 nm
Die size125 mm2192 mm2
Maximum core temperature90 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)74 °Cno data
Number of transistors1,200 million4,800 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplier-+

Compatibility

Information on A9-9420 and EPYC 7502P 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 configuration11 (Uniprocessor)
SocketFT4TR4
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt180 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A9-9420 and EPYC 7502P. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsVirtualization,no data
AES-NI++
FMA+-
AVX++
Precision Boost 2no data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A9-9420 and EPYC 7502P are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A9-9420 and EPYC 7502P. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4DDR4 Eight-channel
Maximum memory sizeno data4 TiB
Max memory channelsno data8
Maximum memory bandwidthno data204.763 GB/s
ECC memory support-+

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardRadeon R5no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A9-9420 and EPYC 7502P.

PCIe version3.0no data
PCI Express lanes8no 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. 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.

A9-9420 0.94
EPYC 7502P 32.06
+3311%

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.

A9-9420 1500
EPYC 7502P 50932
+3295%

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.

A9-9420 325
EPYC 7502P 963
+196%

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.

A9-9420 500
EPYC 7502P 7822
+1464%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.94 32.06
Recency 31 May 2016 7 August 2019
Physical cores 2 32
Threads 2 64
Chip lithography 28 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 180 Watt

A9-9420 has 1100% lower power consumption.

EPYC 7502P, on the other hand, has a 3310.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, 1500% more physical cores and 3100% more threads, and a 300% more advanced lithography process.

The EPYC 7502P is our recommended choice as it beats the A9-9420 in performance tests.

Be aware that A9-9420 is a notebook processor while EPYC 7502P is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between A9-9420 and EPYC 7502P, 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 A9-9420
A9-9420
AMD EPYC 7502P
EPYC 7502P

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.


2.8 513 votes

Rate A9-9420 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 38 votes

Rate EPYC 7502P on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A9-9420 or EPYC 7502P, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.