EPYC 7601 vs Opteron 140 EE

VS

Primary details

Comparing Opteron 140 EE and EPYC 7601 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the rankingnot rated260
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data1.57
Market segmentServerServer
Seriesno dataAMD EPYC
Power efficiencyno data11.01
Architecture codenameSledgeHammer (2003−2005)Naples (2017−2018)
Release dateFebruary 2004 (20 years ago)29 June 2017 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$4,200

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Opteron 140 EE and EPYC 7601 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)32 (Dotriaconta-Core)
Threads164
Base clock speedno data2.2 GHz
Boost clock speed1.4 GHz3.2 GHz
Multiplierno data22
L1 cache128 KB96K (per core)
L2 cache1 MB512K (per core)
L3 cache0 KB64 MB (shared)
Chip lithography130 nm14 nm
Die size193 mm2192 mm2
Number of transistors106 million4,800 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplier-+

Compatibility

Information on Opteron 140 EE and EPYC 7601 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 configuration12 (Multiprocessor)
Socket940TR4
Power consumption (TDP)30 Watt180 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Opteron 140 EE and EPYC 7601. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI-+
AVX-+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Opteron 140 EE and EPYC 7601 are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Opteron 140 EE and EPYC 7601. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR4 Eight-channel
Maximum memory sizeno data2 TiB
Maximum memory bandwidthno data170.671 GB/s

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Opteron 140 EE and EPYC 7601.

PCIe versionno data3.0
PCI Express lanesno data128

Pros & cons summary


Physical cores 1 32
Threads 1 64
Chip lithography 130 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 30 Watt 180 Watt

Opteron 140 EE has 500% lower power consumption.

EPYC 7601, on the other hand, has 3100% more physical cores and 6300% more threads, and a 828.6% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Opteron 140 EE and EPYC 7601. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions on choice between Opteron 140 EE and EPYC 7601, 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.


AMD Opteron 140 EE
Opteron 140 EE
AMD EPYC 7601
EPYC 7601

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.


No user ratings yet.

Rate Opteron 140 EE on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.9 24 votes

Rate EPYC 7601 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Opteron 140 EE or EPYC 7601, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.