Ryzen 7 2700 vs Opteron 840 EE
Primary details
Comparing Opteron 840 EE and Ryzen 7 2700 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | 778 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 8.42 |
| Market segment | Server | Desktop processor |
| Series | no data | AMD Ryzen 7 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 14.38 |
| Architecture codename | SledgeHammer (2003−2005) | Zen+ (2018−2019) |
| Release date | May 2004 (20 years ago) | 19 April 2018 (6 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $299 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Opteron 840 EE and Ryzen 7 2700 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) | 8 (Octa-Core) |
| Threads | 1 | 16 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 3.2 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.4 GHz | 4.1 GHz |
| Bus rate | no data | 4 × 8 GT/s |
| Multiplier | no data | 32 |
| L1 cache | 128 KB | 96K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 512K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 16 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 130 nm | 12 nm |
| Die size | 193 mm2 | 192 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 106 million | 4,800 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
| Unlocked multiplier | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Opteron 840 EE and Ryzen 7 2700 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 | 940 | AM4 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 30 Watt | 65 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Opteron 840 EE and Ryzen 7 2700. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | SSE4.2, SSE4A, AMD-V, AES, AVX2, FMA3, SHA |
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| Precision Boost 2 | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Opteron 840 EE and Ryzen 7 2700 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Opteron 840 EE and Ryzen 7 2700. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR4 Dual-channel |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 64 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 46.933 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Opteron 840 EE and Ryzen 7 2700.
| PCIe version | no data | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 20 |
Pros & cons summary
| Physical cores | 1 | 8 |
| Threads | 1 | 16 |
| Chip lithography | 130 nm | 12 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 30 Watt | 65 Watt |
Opteron 840 EE has 116.7% lower power consumption.
Ryzen 7 2700, on the other hand, has 700% more physical cores and 1500% more threads, and a 983.3% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Opteron 840 EE and Ryzen 7 2700. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that Opteron 840 EE is a server/workstation processor while Ryzen 7 2700 is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Opteron 840 EE and Ryzen 7 2700, 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.
