EPYC 9175F vs Athlon X4 950
Primary details
Comparing Athlon X4 950 and EPYC 9175F processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 1814 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 3.66 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Server |
| Power efficiency | 3.29 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Bristol Ridge (2016−2019) | Turin (2024) |
| Release date | 27 July 2017 (7 years ago) | 10 October 2024 (less than a year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $60 | $4,256 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Athlon X4 950 and EPYC 9175F 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) | 16 (Hexadeca-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 32 |
| Base clock speed | 3.5 GHz | 4.2 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.8 GHz | 5 GHz |
| L1 cache | 128 KB (per core) | 80 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 512 KB (per core) | 1 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 512 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 4 nm |
| Die size | 246 mm2 | 16x 70.6 mm2 |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 74 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 1,178 million | 133,040 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | no data |
| Unlocked multiplier | + | - |
Compatibility
Information on Athlon X4 950 and EPYC 9175F 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 | 2 |
| Socket | AM4 | SP5 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 320 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon X4 950 and EPYC 9175F. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| FMA | + | - |
| AVX | + | + |
| Precision Boost 2 | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Athlon X4 950 and EPYC 9175F are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon X4 950 and EPYC 9175F. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 Dual-channel | DDR5 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | N/A |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Athlon X4 950 and EPYC 9175F.
| PCIe version | no data | 5.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 128 |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 27 July 2017 | 10 October 2024 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 16 |
| Threads | 4 | 32 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 4 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 320 Watt |
Athlon X4 950 has 392.3% lower power consumption.
EPYC 9175F, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 7 years, 300% more physical cores and 700% more threads, and a 600% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Athlon X4 950 and EPYC 9175F. We've got no test results to judge.
Note that Athlon X4 950 is a desktop processor while EPYC 9175F is a server/workstation one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon X4 950 and EPYC 9175F, 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.
