AMD EPYC 7401P vs Intel Atom x7433RE Comparison

The AMD EPYC 7401P and the Intel Atom x7433RE occupy opposite ends of the computing spectrum, yet the database places both in the same overall percentile band, at 61 percent versus all recorded CPUs. That coincidence invites a closer look. Both chips are active products, both carry an average benchmark score in the mid-five-thousands (5814 for the EPYC, 5601 for the Atom), and yet their head-to-head results tell a radically different story. How can two processors with nearly identical aggregate scores diverge so sharply when measured directly against each other?

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Every shared benchmark in the database was won by the EPYC 7401P, and not by a narrow margin. The gap is strikingly consistent, hovering around 570 percent across all five tests.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the EPYC 7401P scored 2384 against the Atom x7433RE's 356, a 569.7 percent advantage. Cinebench R20 multi-core repeats the pattern almost exactly: 9937 versus 1484, a 569.6 percent delta. The R23 multi-core test lands at 23660 versus 3535, a 569.3 percent spread. The consistency is remarkable. Five different workloads, all rendering-centric, all producing essentially the same ratio, suggests the difference is structural rather than workload-dependent.

Single-core results follow suit. Cinebench R20 single-core reads 1402 for the EPYC against 209 for the Atom, a 570.8 percent gap, and R23 single-core shows 3340 versus 499, again 569.3 percent in the EPYC's favor. This is the more curious finding of the pair. The Atom x7433RE carries a higher boost clock, 3.40 versus the EPYC's 3.00, and rides a newer 10 nm process node against the EPYC's 14 nm. On paper, one might expect the Atom to at least contest the lightly threaded tests. It does not, at least not in these rendering workloads, where the recorded data shows the EPYC's Zen cores dominating per-thread output.

The final tally: five wins for the EPYC 7401P, zero for the Atom x7433RE.

Where Each One Wins

Strictly from the shared benchmark set, the EPYC 7401P wins everywhere. Multi-core, single-core, older Cinebench revisions, newer ones: all land in the EPYC's column. If your workload is rendering, simulation, or any throughput task measured by these tests, the data leaves no ambiguity.

The Atom x7433RE's case rests on different ground. Its own benchmark record includes Passmark results the EPYC does not share in this comparison, such as 43671 in data compression, 13054 in integer math, 8582 in floating point math, and 1568 in the single-thread Passmark test. These are not directly comparable to the EPYC's suite here, but they establish that the Atom has a measured, characterized performance profile of its own. Where the Atom genuinely differentiates itself is in its design intent: a 9 W TDP against the EPYC's 170 W, an integrated UHD Graphics 32EU unit where the EPYC has none, and support for DDR5 memory alongside DDR4. None of that shows up in Cinebench scores, yet all of it matters enormously for the mobile segment Intel targeted.

So the split is less about which benchmarks each chip wins and more about which questions each chip answers. The EPYC answers raw throughput. The Atom answers efficiency, footprint, and integration.

Architecture Differences

The EPYC 7401P is a Naples-generation Zen design, fabricated on a 14 nm GlobalFoundries process, packing 4800 million transistors into a 213 mm² die. It runs 24 cores and 48 threads, with a 2000.00 base clock and a 3.00 boost. Its cache hierarchy is deep: 96 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and a 64 MB shared L3 pool. That last figure looms large in any workload with a large working set, and it is more than ten times the Atom's total shared L3.

The Atom x7433RE is an Amston Lake part built on Intel's own 10 nm process, using Gracemont-class cores. It has 4 cores and 4 threads, no simultaneous multithreading, a 1.50 base clock and a 3.40 boost. Its caches are comparatively modest: 96 KB of L1 per core (matching the EPYC per core), 2 MB of shared L2, and 6 MB of shared L3. Transistor count and die size are not recorded in the database for this part.

Two architectural notes stand out. First, the Atom's much wider boost range, from 1.50 up to 3.40, suggests aggressive clock scaling that a 9 W envelope permits in short bursts. Second, the memory subsystems diverge sharply: the EPYC offers an eight-channel DDR4 bus delivering 170.6 GB/s of bandwidth, while the Atom runs a single-channel bus at 38.4 GB/s, though it adds DDR5 support the EPYC lacks. ECC is present on the EPYC and absent on the Atom, a meaningful line for server and workstation deployments where data integrity is non-negotiable.

PCIe is a shared nominal generation, Gen 3 on both, but the Atom specifies 9 lanes from the CPU, while the EPYC's SP3 platform carries server-class lane counts implied by its segment. The EPYC also has an unlocked multiplier; the Atom does not.

Specification Differences

The field-by-field differences:

• Cores/threads: 24 cores, 48 threads (EPYC) versus 4 cores, 4 threads (Atom)
• Base clock: 2000.00 (EPYC) versus 1.50 (Atom)
• Boost clock: 3.00 (EPYC) versus 3.40 (Atom)
• TDP: 170 W (EPYC) versus 9 W (Atom)
• Socket: AMD Socket SP3 versus Intel BGA 1264
• Architecture: Zen (Naples) versus Amston Lake (Gracemont)
• Process node: 14 nm GlobalFoundries versus 10 nm Intel
• L2 cache: 512 KB per core (EPYC) versus 2 MB shared (Atom)
• L3 cache: 64 MB shared (EPYC) versus 6 MB shared (Atom)
• Memory: DDR4, eight-channel, 170.6 GB/s (EPYC) versus DDR4/DDR5, single-channel, 38.4 GB/s (Atom)
• ECC: supported (EPYC) versus not supported (Atom)
• Integrated graphics: none (EPYC) versus UHD Graphics 32EU (Atom)
• Market segment: Server/Workstation versus Mobile
• Release date: 2017-06-28 versus 2024-04-07
• Launch MSRP: not recorded for the EPYC; $63 for the Atom
• Multiplier: unlocked (EPYC) versus locked (Atom)
• Foundry: GlobalFoundries versus Intel

Both parts remain in active production, and both sit at the 61st percentile against the full CPU database.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster in benchmarks?

A: The EPYC 7401P won all five head-to-head tests, by roughly 570 percent each time. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 23660 dwarfs the Atom's 3535.

Q: Does the Atom win any single-core test?

A: No. Despite a higher 3.40 boost clock, it lost Cinebench R20 single-core (209 versus 1402) and R23 single-core (499 versus 3340).

Q: Which chip is more power-efficient by design?

A: The Atom x7433RE, with a 9 W TDP against the EPYC's 170 W. The database records TDP as a specification, not as measured efficiency, but the design targets are unambiguous.

Q: Which CPUs are their closest rivals?

A: The EPYC 7401P sits within 0.2 percent of the Intel Xeon E-2388G (5805), 0.8 percent of the Xeon W-2175 (5770), 1.5 percent of the Threadripper 2920X (5730), and 1.7 percent behind the EPYC 7451 (5915). The Atom x7433RE is within 0.1 percent of the Core i7-12700T (5606), 0.2 percent of the Ryzen 7 PRO 3700 (5610), 0.3 percent of the Core i9-11900KB (5587), and 0.7 percent of the Celeron G6900 (5561).

Q: Which one supports ECC memory?

A: Only the EPYC 7401P. The Atom x7433RE does not support ECC.

Q: Which one has integrated graphics?

A: The Atom x7433RE, with UHD Graphics 32EU. The EPYC 7401P has no integrated GPU.

The Verdict

For throughput, the verdict is a rout. The EPYC 7401P wins every shared benchmark by a margin near 570 percent, and it does so while offering 24 cores, 48 threads, 64 MB of shared L3, eight-channel DDR4 at 170.6 GB/s, and ECC support. Anyone running rendering, virtualization, or parallel server workloads should find the recorded data decisive.

The Atom x7433RE is not competing on that axis, and the data shows it. Its strengths are elsewhere: a 9 W TDP, integrated UHD Graphics 32EU, DDR5 compatibility, a soldered BGA 1264 package, and a 2024 release date reflecting a far newer platform. Its rival list, populated by mobile-oriented and entry-level desktop chips within a fraction of a percent of its 5601 average score, confirms its competitive context is entirely different from the EPYC's Xeon and Threadripper neighborhood.

Curiously, both processors land at the same 61st percentile against the database at large. That is a reminder that percentile placement aggregates across very different test suites and eras. When the two are measured on identical workloads, the EPYC 7401P stands alone. Choose it for compute. Choose the Atom x7433RE when the constraint is power, packaging, or platform currency rather than raw speed, a distinction its launch MSRP of $63 and mobile segment make explicit.