Ryzen Threadripper 1977X vs Atom D510
Primary details
Comparing Atom D510 and Ryzen Threadripper 1977X processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
Place in the ranking | not rated | not rated |
Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
Architecture codename | Pineview (2009−2011) | Zen (2017−2020) |
Release date | 21 December 2009 (14 years ago) | no data (2024 years ago) |
Launch price (MSRP) | $97 | no data |
Detailed specifications
Atom D510 and Ryzen Threadripper 1977X 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) | 14 (Tetradeca-Core) |
Threads | 4 | no data |
Base clock speed | 1.66 GHz | no data |
Boost clock speed | 1.67 GHz | 3.5 GHz |
L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 128 KB (per core) |
L2 cache | 512 KB (per core) | 512 KB (per core) |
L3 cache | 0 KB | 32768 KB |
Chip lithography | 45 nm | 14 nm |
Die size | 66 mm2 | no data |
Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | no data |
Number of transistors | 176 million | no data |
64 bit support | + | + |
Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Unlocked multiplier | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Atom D510 and Ryzen Threadripper 1977X 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 | 1 |
Socket | FCBGA559 | SP3r2 |
Power consumption (TDP) | 13 Watt | 155 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Atom D510 and Ryzen Threadripper 1977X. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE2, Intel® SSE3, Intel® SSSE3 | no data |
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | - | no data |
Turbo Boost Technology | - | no data |
Hyper-Threading Technology | + | no data |
Idle States | - | no data |
Demand Based Switching | - | no data |
PAE | 32 Bit | no data |
Security technologies
Atom D510 and Ryzen Threadripper 1977X technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
TXT | - | no data |
EDB | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Atom D510 and Ryzen Threadripper 1977X are enumerated here.
AMD-V | - | + |
VT-d | - | no data |
VT-x | - | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Atom D510 and Ryzen Threadripper 1977X. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
Supported memory types | DDR2 | DDR4 |
Maximum memory size | 4 GB | no data |
Max memory channels | 1 | no data |
Maximum memory bandwidth | 6.4 GB/s | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
Integrated graphics card | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) | no data |
Pros & cons summary
Physical cores | 2 | 14 |
Chip lithography | 45 nm | 14 nm |
Power consumption (TDP) | 13 Watt | 155 Watt |
Atom D510 has 1092.3% lower power consumption.
Ryzen Threadripper 1977X, on the other hand, has 600% more physical cores, and a 221.4% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Atom D510 and Ryzen Threadripper 1977X. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that Atom D510 is a notebook processor while Ryzen Threadripper 1977X is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Atom D510 and Ryzen Threadripper 1977X, 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.