Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U vs Atom E645C
Primary details
Comparing Atom E645C and Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | 1374 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | no data | AMD Ryzen 5 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 26.50 |
| Architecture codename | Stellarton (2010) | Raven Ridge (2017−2018) |
| Release date | 22 November 2010 (13 years ago) | 8 January 2018 (6 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Atom E645C and Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U 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 | 1 (Single-Core) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 8 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 2 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1 GHz | 2 GHz |
| Multiplier | no data | 20 |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 384 KB |
| L2 cache | 512 KB (per core) | 2 MB |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 4 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 26 mm2 | 209.78 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 105 °C |
| Number of transistors | 47 million | 4950 Million |
| 64 bit support | - | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Atom E645C and Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U 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 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | Intel BGA1466 | FP5 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 4 Watt | 15 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Atom E645C and Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | XFR, FMA3, SSE 4.2, AVX2, SMT |
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | + | no data |
| Precision Boost 2 | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Atom E645C and Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Atom E645C and Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR2 | DDR4 Dual-channel |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 32 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 38.397 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | Intel GMA 600 | AMD Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Atom E645C and Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U.
| PCIe version | no data | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 12 |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 22 November 2010 | 8 January 2018 |
| Physical cores | 1 | 4 |
| Threads | 2 | 8 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 4 Watt | 15 Watt |
Atom E645C has 275% lower power consumption.
Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 7 years, 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads, and a 221.4% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Atom E645C and Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Atom E645C and Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U, 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.
