Opteron 842 vs Ryzen 5 2400G
Primary details
Comparing Ryzen 5 2400G and Opteron 842 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 1151 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 5.92 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Server |
| Series | AMD Ryzen 5 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 7.99 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Raven Ridge (2017−2018) | SledgeHammer (2003−2005) |
| Release date | 12 February 2018 (6 years ago) | June 2003 (21 year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $169 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Ryzen 5 2400G and Opteron 842 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 | 4 (Quad-Core) | 1 (Single-Core) |
| Threads | 8 | 1 |
| Base clock speed | 3.6 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 3.9 GHz | 1.6 GHz |
| Multiplier | 36 | no data |
| L1 cache | 128K (per core) | 128 KB |
| L2 cache | 512K (per core) | 1 MB |
| L3 cache | 4 MB (shared) | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 130 nm |
| Die size | 210 mm2 | 193 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 4,950 million | 106 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Ryzen 5 2400G and Opteron 842 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) | 8 |
| Socket | AM4 | 940 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 85 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 5 2400G and Opteron 842. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | XFR, FMA3, SSE 4.2, AVX2, SMT | no data |
| AES-NI | + | - |
| FMA | + | - |
| AVX | + | - |
| Precision Boost 2 | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 5 2400G and Opteron 842 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 5 2400G and Opteron 842. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 Dual-channel | no data |
| Maximum memory size | 64 GB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 2 | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 46.933 GB/s | no data |
| ECC memory support | + | - |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 5 2400G and Opteron 842.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | no data |
| PCI Express lanes | 12 | no data |
Pros & cons summary
| Physical cores | 4 | 1 |
| Threads | 8 | 1 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 130 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 85 Watt |
Ryzen 5 2400G has 300% more physical cores and 700% more threads, a 828.6% more advanced lithography process, and 30.8% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Ryzen 5 2400G and Opteron 842. We've got no test results to judge.
Note that Ryzen 5 2400G is a desktop processor while Opteron 842 is a server/workstation one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 5 2400G and Opteron 842, 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.
