EPYC 7642 vs Pentium 4 1.9

VS

Primary details

Comparing Pentium 4 1.9 and EPYC 7642 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the rankingnot rated91
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data5.27
Market segmentDesktop processorServer
Seriesno dataAMD EPYC
Power efficiencyno data15.57
Architecture codenameWillamette (2000−2001)Zen 2 (2017−2020)
Release dateAugust 2001 (23 years ago)7 August 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$4,775

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Pentium 4 1.9 and EPYC 7642 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)48 (Octatetraconta-Core)
Threads196
Base clock speedno data2.4 GHz
Boost clock speed1.9 GHz3.4 GHz
Multiplierno data23
L1 cache8 KB96K (per core)
L2 cache256 KB512K (per core)
L3 cache0 KB256 MB (shared)
Chip lithography180 nm7 nm, 14 nm
Die size217 mm2192 mm2
Maximum case temperature (TCase)73 °Cno data
Number of transistors42 million4,800 million
64 bit support-+
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplier-+

Compatibility

Information on Pentium 4 1.9 and EPYC 7642 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)
Socket423TR4
Power consumption (TDP)69 Watt225 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Pentium 4 1.9 and EPYC 7642. 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 Pentium 4 1.9 and EPYC 7642 are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Pentium 4 1.9 and EPYC 7642. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR1, DDR2DDR4 Eight-channel
Maximum memory sizeno data4 TiB
Max memory channelsno data8
Maximum memory bandwidthno data204.763 GB/s
ECC memory support-+

Pros & cons summary


Physical cores 1 48
Threads 1 96
Chip lithography 180 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 69 Watt 225 Watt

Pentium 4 1.9 has 226.1% lower power consumption.

EPYC 7642, on the other hand, has 4700% more physical cores and 9500% more threads, and a 2471.4% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Pentium 4 1.9 and EPYC 7642. We've got no test results to judge.

Note that Pentium 4 1.9 is a desktop processor while EPYC 7642 is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Pentium 4 1.9 and EPYC 7642, 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 Pentium 4 1.9
Pentium 4 1.9
AMD EPYC 7642
EPYC 7642

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.


2.4 200 votes

Rate Pentium 4 1.9 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.6 11 votes

Rate EPYC 7642 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Pentium 4 1.9 or EPYC 7642, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.