AMD EPYC 7501 vs Intel Atom x7405C Comparison

FAQ

Q: How do the two CPUs compare in overall benchmark averages?

A: The AMD EPYC 7501 has an average benchmark score of 6128, while the Intel Atom x7405C records an average of 6568. Despite the Atom's higher average, the EPYC wins all six shared head-to-head Cinebench tests.

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD EPYC 7501 has 32 cores and 64 threads, whereas the Intel Atom x7405C has 4 cores and 4 threads. The EPYC's core count is eight times higher on both metrics.

Q: What are the clock speed differences?

A: The EPYC 7501 has a base clock of 2000 MHz and a boost clock of 3.00 GHz. The Atom x7405C has a base clock of 1.70 GHz and a boost clock of 3.40 GHz, giving the Atom a higher boost ceiling.

Q: How do their memory systems differ?

A: The EPYC 7501 supports DDR4 over an eight-channel memory bus with 170.6 GB/s bandwidth and ECC memory. The Atom x7405C supports DDR4 and DDR5 over a single-channel bus with 38.4 GB/s bandwidth and no ECC support.

Q: Which processor has a higher single-core Cinebench score?

A: The EPYC 7501 leads in every single-core Cinebench test. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the EPYC scores 2991 versus the Atom's 626, a 377.8% difference in favor of AMD.

Q: What is the production status and release date for each?

A: Both are listed as Active in production. The EPYC 7501 released on 2017-06-28, and the Atom x7405C released on 2024-04-07.

Where Each One Wins

The recorded data shows a complete sweep for the AMD EPYC 7501 across all six shared Cinebench tests. The EPYC wins every multicore and single-core comparison, with deltas ranging from 377.7% to 385.5%. There are no benchmark wins for the Intel Atom x7405C in the head-to-head set.

That said, the Atom x7405C holds its own in the broader database context. Its percentile ranking is 62 versus the EPYC's 61, and its average benchmark score is higher at 6568 versus 6128. The Atom's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i5-13500E with an average score of 6586 and a delta of -0.3%, and the Intel Core i9-7960X at 6533 with a delta of +0.5%. The EPYC's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i9-7940X at 6147 with a delta of -0.3% and the AMD EPYC 7272 at 6186 with a delta of -0.9%.

The practical split is clear: the EPYC 7501 dominates in raw rendering and compute workloads measured by Cinebench, while the Atom x7405C appears in a different performance tier despite its higher average score, likely due to its Passmark results covering a wider range of tests. The Atom's Passmark data includes integer math (14669), floating point math (9063), and data compression (56317), which contribute to its average but do not appear in the shared benchmark set.

Architecture Differences

The AMD EPYC 7501 uses the Zen architecture with the codename Naples, built on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It integrates 4,800 million transistors on a 213 mm² die. The Atom x7405C uses the Amston Lake architecture with the Gracemont generation, built on a 10 nm process at Intel. Its transistor count and die size are not recorded in the database.

Cache configurations differ substantially. The EPYC has 96 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and 64 MB shared L3. The Atom also has 96 KB L1 per core, but its L2 is 2 MB shared, and its L3 is 6 MB shared. The EPYC's L1 cache matches the Atom per core, but the EPYC's L3 capacity is over ten times larger.

Memory support diverges sharply. The EPYC supports DDR4 only, over an eight-channel bus with 170.6 GB/s bandwidth and ECC memory. The Atom supports both DDR4 and DDR5, but over a single-channel bus with 38.4 GB/s bandwidth and no ECC. PCIe is Gen 3 for both, though the Atom has 9 lanes (CPU only), while the EPYC's lane count is not explicitly listed.

The EPYC uses AMD Socket SP3, while the Atom uses Intel BGA 1264. The EPYC has an unlocked multiplier; the Atom does not. Integrated graphics are absent for the EPYC, and the Atom lists "N/A" for integrated graphics. The EPYC targets the Server/Workstation segment, while the Atom targets Mobile.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every specification category. Core count: 32 versus 4. Thread count: 64 versus 4. Base clock: 2000 MHz versus 1.70 GHz. Boost clock: 3.00 GHz versus 3.40 GHz. TDP: 170 watts versus 12 watts. Socket: AMD Socket SP3 versus Intel BGA 1264.

Process node: 14 nm versus 10 nm. Foundry: GlobalFoundries versus Intel. Transistors: 4,800 million versus not recorded. Die size: 213 mm² versus not recorded. L2 cache: 512 KB per core versus 2 MB shared. L3 cache: 64 MB shared versus 6 MB shared.

Memory bus: eight-channel versus single-channel. Memory bandwidth: 170.6 GB/s versus 38.4 GB/s. ECC memory: true versus false. Market segment: Server/Workstation versus Mobile. Release date: 2017-06-28 versus 2024-04-07. Unlocked multiplier: true versus false.

The TDP difference is the most extreme: the EPYC draws 170 watts, while the Atom draws 12 watts, a 14x gap. This aligns with their respective market segments and physical footprints.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data contains six Cinebench comparisons, all won by the AMD EPYC 7501. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the EPYC scores 2135 against the Atom's 446, a 378.7% delta. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the EPYC scores 301 versus 62, a 385.5% delta, the largest margin in the set.

In Cinebench R20 multicore, the EPYC records 8898 versus 1862, a 377.9% delta. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the EPYC scores 1256 versus 262, a 379.4% delta. In Cinebench R23 multicore, the EPYC scores 21186 versus 4435, a 377.7% delta. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the EPYC scores 2991 versus 626, a 377.8% delta.

The deltas are remarkably consistent, hovering near 378-379% for multicore and ranging from 377.8% to 385.5% for single-core. The single-core R15 test shows the widest gap, with the EPYC outperforming the Atom by 385.5%. The multicore R23 test shows the narrowest gap at 377.7%, though still an enormous margin.

The EPYC's multicore advantage reflects its 32-core, 64-thread configuration. Its single-core advantage is less expected given the Atom's higher boost clock of 3.40 GHz versus 3.00 GHz, but the data shows the EPYC's Zen cores deliver substantially higher per-thread performance in Cinebench.

The Verdict

The AMD EPYC 7501 is the clear choice for any workload represented by the shared Cinebench benchmarks. It wins all six head-to-head tests with margins between 377.7% and 385.5%. The data shows a processor with 32 cores, 64 threads, and 64 MB of L3 cache that delivers dominant multicore rendering performance. Its eight-channel memory bus and 170.6 GB/s bandwidth further position it for server and workstation tasks where memory throughput matters.

The Intel Atom x7405C should be selected for scenarios where its profile fits. It has a 62nd percentile ranking versus the EPYC's 61st, and its average benchmark score of 6568 is higher. Its Passmark results, including integer math at 14669 and floating point math at 9063, suggest competence in specific compute tasks not covered by the Cinebench head-to-head. Its 12-watt TDP makes it suitable for low-power mobile applications, and its support for DDR5 memory gives it a modern memory interface, though single-channel only.

The verdict from the data: the EPYC 7501 for raw compute throughput in server or workstation contexts, the Atom x7405C for low-power mobile use cases where its higher average score and broader Passmark coverage matter. The EPYC's six wins with no losses in the head-to-head set make it the benchmark leader, but the Atom's higher overall average and percentile ranking prevent a simple dismissal. Buyers should match the processor to the specific workload: Cinebench-style rendering favors AMD decisively, while the Atom's Passmark profile and efficiency profile suit a different niche.