EPYC 9555P vs Solo ULV U1300

VS

Primary details

Comparing Core Solo ULV U1300 and EPYC 9555P processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the rankingnot ratednot rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopServer
Architecture codenameYonah (2005−2006)Turin (2024)
Release dateApril 2006 (18 years ago)10 October 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$7,983

Detailed specifications

Core Solo ULV U1300 and EPYC 9555P 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 cores1 (Single-Core)64 (Tetrahexaconta-Core)
Threads1128
Base clock speedno data3.2 GHz
Boost clock speed1.07 GHz4.4 GHz
L1 cache64 KB80 KB (per core)
L2 cache2 MB1 MB (per core)
L3 cache0 KB256 MB (shared)
Chip lithography65 nm4 nm
Die size90 mm28x 70.6 mm2
Number of transistors151 million66,520 million
64 bit support-+
Windows 11 compatibility-no data

Compatibility

Information on Core Solo ULV U1300 and EPYC 9555P 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 configuration11
Socket479SP5
Power consumption (TDP)5 Watt360 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core Solo ULV U1300 and EPYC 9555P. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI-+
AVX-+
Precision Boost 2no data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core Solo ULV U1300 and EPYC 9555P are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core Solo ULV U1300 and EPYC 9555P. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR1DDR5

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataN/A

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core Solo ULV U1300 and EPYC 9555P.

PCIe versionno data5.0
PCI Express lanesno data128

Pros & cons summary


Physical cores 1 64
Threads 1 128
Chip lithography 65 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 5 Watt 360 Watt

Solo ULV U1300 has 7100% lower power consumption.

EPYC 9555P, on the other hand, has 6300% more physical cores and 12700% more threads, and a 1525% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Core Solo ULV U1300 and EPYC 9555P. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Core Solo ULV U1300 is a notebook processor while EPYC 9555P is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core Solo ULV U1300 and EPYC 9555P, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


Intel Core Solo ULV U1300
Core Solo ULV U1300
AMD EPYC 9555P
EPYC 9555P

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.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


5 1 vote

Rate Core Solo ULV U1300 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5 1 vote

Rate EPYC 9555P on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core Solo ULV U1300 or EPYC 9555P, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.