EPYC 9654 vs Duron 1000
Primary details
Comparing Duron 1000 and EPYC 9654 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | 6 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 1.36 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Server |
| Series | AMD Duron | AMD EPYC |
| Power efficiency | no data | 19.89 |
| Architecture codename | Morgan (2001−2002) | Genoa (2022−2023) |
| Release date | 20 August 2001 (23 years ago) | 10 November 2022 (2 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $89 | $11,805 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Duron 1000 and EPYC 9654 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) | 96 |
| Threads | 1 | 192 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 2.4 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1 GHz | 3.7 GHz |
| Bus type | FSB | no data |
| Bus rate | 200 MT/s | no data |
| Multiplier | 10 | 24 |
| L1 cache | 128 KB | 64K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 64 KB | 1 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | no data | 384 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 180 nm | 5 nm, 6 nm |
| Die size | 106 mm2 | 12x 72 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 25 million | 78,840 million |
| 64 bit support | - | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Duron 1000 and EPYC 9654 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) | 2 |
| Socket | A | SP5 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 46 Watt | 360 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Duron 1000 and EPYC 9654. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| Precision Boost 2 | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Duron 1000 and EPYC 9654 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Duron 1000 and EPYC 9654. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR1 Depends on motherboard | DDR5-4800 |
| Maximum memory size | 4 GB | 6 TiB |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 460.8 GB/s |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Duron 1000 and EPYC 9654.
| PCIe version | no data | 5.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 128 |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 20 August 2001 | 10 November 2022 |
| Physical cores | 1 | 96 |
| Threads | 1 | 192 |
| Chip lithography | 180 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 46 Watt | 360 Watt |
Duron 1000 has 682.6% lower power consumption.
EPYC 9654, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 21 year, 9500% more physical cores and 19100% more threads, and a 3500% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Duron 1000 and EPYC 9654. We've got no test results to judge.
Note that Duron 1000 is a desktop processor while EPYC 9654 is a server/workstation one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Duron 1000 and EPYC 9654, 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.
