EPYC 7713P vs Atom Z612
Primary details
Comparing Atom Z612 and EPYC 7713P processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | 32 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 6.77 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Server |
| Series | Intel Atom | AMD EPYC |
| Power efficiency | no data | 21.50 |
| Architecture codename | Lincroft (2010−2011) | Milan (2021−2023) |
| Release date | 4 May 2010 (14 years ago) | 15 March 2021 (3 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $5,010 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Atom Z612 and EPYC 7713P 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) | 64 (Tetrahexaconta-Core) |
| Threads | 1 | 128 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 2 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 0.9 GHz | 3.68 GHz |
| Bus type | cDMI | no data |
| Bus rate | 400 MT/s | no data |
| Multiplier | 9 | 20 |
| L1 cache | 64K (per core) | 64 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 512 KB (per core) | 512 KB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 256 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 7 nm+ |
| Die size | 65.2526 mm2 | 8x 81 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 140 million | 33,200 million |
| 64 bit support | - | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Atom Z612 and EPYC 7713P 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 | Intel BGA 518 | SP3 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 1.3 Watt | 225 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Atom Z612 and EPYC 7713P. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Atom Z612 and EPYC 7713P are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Atom Z612 and EPYC 7713P. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR1, DDR2 | DDR4-3200 |
| Maximum memory size | 2 GB | 4 TiB |
| Max memory channels | 1 | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 3.2 GB/s | 204.795 GB/s |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | PowerVR SGX535 | N/A |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Atom Z612 and EPYC 7713P.
| PCIe version | no data | 4.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 128 |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 4 May 2010 | 15 March 2021 |
| Physical cores | 1 | 64 |
| Threads | 1 | 128 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 1 Watt | 225 Watt |
Atom Z612 has 22400% lower power consumption.
EPYC 7713P, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 10 years, 6300% more physical cores and 12700% more threads, and a 542.9% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Atom Z612 and EPYC 7713P. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that Atom Z612 is a notebook processor while EPYC 7713P is a server/workstation one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Atom Z612 and EPYC 7713P, 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.
