Ryzen Embedded 8840U vs Athlon PRO 200GE
Primary details
Comparing Athlon PRO 200GE and Ryzen Embedded 8840U processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 1795 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | AMD Athlon | no data |
| Power efficiency | 6.27 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Zen (2017−2020) | Hawk Point (2024) |
| Release date | 1 June 2018 (6 years ago) | 2 April 2024 (less than a year ago) |
Detailed specifications
Athlon PRO 200GE and Ryzen Embedded 8840U 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 | 2 (Dual-core) | 8 (Octa-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 16 |
| Base clock speed | 3.2 GHz | 3.3 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.2 GHz | 5.1 GHz |
| Multiplier | 32 | no data |
| L1 cache | 96K (per core) | 64 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 512K (per core) | 1 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 4 MB (shared) | 16 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 4 nm |
| Die size | 209.78 mm2 | 178 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 4,800 million | 25,000 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Athlon PRO 200GE and Ryzen Embedded 8840U 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 (Uniprocessor) | 1 |
| Socket | AM4 | FP8 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 28 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon PRO 200GE and Ryzen Embedded 8840U. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| FMA | + | - |
| AVX | + | + |
| Precision Boost 2 | + | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Athlon PRO 200GE and Ryzen Embedded 8840U are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon PRO 200GE and Ryzen Embedded 8840U. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 Dual-channel | DDR5 |
| Maximum memory size | 64 GB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 2 | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 42.671 GB/s | no data |
| ECC memory support | + | - |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | AMD Radeon RX Vega 3 | AMD Radeon 780M |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Athlon PRO 200GE and Ryzen Embedded 8840U.
| PCIe version | no data | 4.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 20 |
Pros & cons summary
| Integrated graphics card | 2.98 | 18.31 |
| Recency | 1 June 2018 | 2 April 2024 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 8 |
| Threads | 2 | 16 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 4 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 28 Watt |
Ryzen Embedded 8840U has 514.4% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 5 years, 300% more physical cores and 700% more threads, a 250% more advanced lithography process, and 25% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Athlon PRO 200GE and Ryzen Embedded 8840U. We've got no test results to judge.
Note that Athlon PRO 200GE is a desktop processor while Ryzen Embedded 8840U is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon PRO 200GE and Ryzen Embedded 8840U, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
