AMD EPYC 7F52 vs Intel Atom x7835RE Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a decisive picture. Across every Cinebench test recorded in the database, the AMD EPYC 7F52 outperforms the Intel Atom x7835RE by a substantial margin. The most significant victories come in the multi-core tests, where the EPYC 7F52’s advantage is consistently above 480%.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the EPYC 7F52 scores 3540 against the Atom x7835RE’s 609, a delta of 481.3%. The single-core R15 test shows a similar gap: 499 versus 85, a 487.1% difference. Moving to Cinebench R20, the multi-core result is 14751 for the EPYC 7F52 versus 2541 for the Atom, a 480.5% delta. The single-core R20 score is 2082 against 358, a 481.6% delta.

The pattern holds in the newer Cinebench R23 suite. The EPYC 7F52 records 35123 in multi-core, while the Atom x7835RE manages 6051, a 480.4% delta. In single-core R23, the scores are 4958 and 854 respectively, a 480.6% delta. The data shows a clean sweep: the EPYC 7F52 wins all six head-to-head benchmark comparisons, with the Atom x7835RE recording zero wins.

These deltas are remarkably consistent, hovering near 480% across all tests. This uniformity suggests the performance gap is structural rather than workload-dependent, stemming from fundamental differences in core count, thread support, and clock speeds. The EPYC 7F52’s 16 cores and 32 threads provide a clear multi-threaded advantage, while its 3.50 GHz base clock and 3.90 GHz boost clock dwarf the Atom’s 1.30 GHz base and 3.60 GHz boost. Even in single-threaded tests, where the Atom’s boost clock is relatively close, the EPYC 7F52 still leads by nearly fivefold.

The Verdict

The database’s measurements are unambiguous. The AMD EPYC 7F52 is the dominant processor in every recorded benchmark. Its percentile ranking of 66 places it ahead of 66% of all CPUs in the database, while the Intel Atom x7835RE sits at 65. This near-identical percentile ranking is notable given the massive benchmark score differences, reflecting the fact that both processors occupy different performance tiers within their respective market segments.

The EPYC 7F52’s average benchmark score of 10159 aligns closely with its nearest rivals: the Intel Xeon Platinum 8280 scores 10230 (-0.7% delta), the Intel Xeon Gold 6312U scores 10291 (-1.3%), the Intel Xeon E3-1565L v5 scores 10320 (-1.6%), and the Intel Xeon Gold 6338N scores 10347 (-1.8%). These deltas indicate the EPYC 7F52 sits within 2% of a cluster of high-end server processors.

The Atom x7835RE, by contrast, has an average score of 9430. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon Platinum 8180 at 9406 (0.3% delta), the Intel Core i7-7700HQ at 9493 (-0.7%), the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5945WX at 9348 (0.9%), and the AMD EPYC 7402P at 9529 (-1%). This places the Atom in a completely different performance neighborhood.

For workloads requiring maximum compute throughput, the EPYC 7F52 is the clear choice. The data shows it outperforms the Atom x7835RE by more than 480% in all tested scenarios. However, the Atom’s significantly lower power envelope, 12 W versus 240 W, and its mobile market segment suggest it targets a different use case entirely, prioritizing efficiency over raw performance.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent fundamentally different architectural approaches. The AMD EPYC 7F52 is built on the Zen 2 architecture, codenamed Rome, and belongs to the EPYC generation. It uses a 7 nm process node from TSMC, with 3,800 million transistors on a 74 mm² die. The Intel Atom x7835RE uses the Amston Lake architecture, part of the Atom generation with Gracemont cores, fabricated on Intel’s 10 nm process.

Core configurations differ sharply. The EPYC 7F52 has 16 cores and 32 threads, while the Atom x7835RE has 8 cores and 8 threads, meaning no simultaneous multithreading on the Atom. This explains the multi-core benchmark disparity more than any other factor.

Cache hierarchies also diverge. Both have 96 KB of L1 cache per core. The L2 cache differs: the EPYC 7F52 has 512 KB per core, while the Atom has 2 MB per module. The L3 cache shows the biggest gap: the EPYC 7F52 has 256 MB shared, while the Atom has only 6 MB shared.

Memory architecture is another major differentiator. The EPYC 7F52 supports DDR4 memory over an eight-channel bus, yielding 204.8 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The Atom x7835RE supports both DDR4 and DDR5, but only over a single-channel bus, capping bandwidth at 38.4 GB/s. ECC memory is supported on the EPYC 7F52 but not on the Atom.

The processors also differ in PCIe capabilities. The EPYC 7F52 uses PCIe Gen 4, while the Atom x7835RE uses PCIe Gen 3 with 9 lanes (CPU only). The Atom includes integrated UHD Graphics 32EU, while the EPYC 7F52 has no integrated graphics. Sockets differ as well: the EPYC 7F52 uses AMD Socket SP3, while the Atom uses Intel BGA 1264.

Release timelines reflect the generational distance. The EPYC 7F52 launched on April 13, 2020, while the Atom x7835RE arrived on April 7, 2024. Both remain in active production.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD EPYC 7F52 has 16 cores and 32 threads. The Intel Atom x7835RE has 8 cores and 8 threads.

Q: What is the performance difference in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The EPYC 7F52 scores 35123, while the Atom x7835RE scores 6051. This represents a 480.4% delta in favor of the EPYC 7F52.

Q: Does the Intel Atom x7835RE support ECC memory?

A: No. The database indicates ECC memory is not supported on the Atom x7835RE. The AMD EPYC 7F52 does support ECC memory.

Q: How do the memory bandwidth figures compare?

A: The EPYC 7F52 has a memory bandwidth of 204.8 GB/s over an eight-channel DDR4 bus. The Atom x7835RE has 38.4 GB/s over a single-channel bus supporting both DDR4 and DDR5.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The EPYC 7F52 has a TDP of 240 W, while the Atom x7835RE has a TDP of 12 W.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: Only the Intel Atom x7835RE has integrated graphics, specifically UHD Graphics 32EU. The AMD EPYC 7F52 has none.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD EPYC 7F52 wins in every recorded benchmark category. Its 16 cores, 32 threads, and 256 MB of L3 cache make it suitable for heavily threaded server workloads, virtualization, and data processing. The eight-channel memory interface with 204.8 GB/s bandwidth supports memory-intensive applications. The 7 nm Zen 2 architecture with 3,800 million transistors delivers high per-core performance, as evidenced by the single-core Cinebench results where it leads by approximately 480% over the Atom.

The Intel Atom x7835RE, despite losing all benchmark comparisons, has its own domain. Its 12 W TDP makes it appropriate for power-constrained environments, fanless designs, or battery-operated mobile systems. The integrated UHD Graphics 32EU eliminates the need for a discrete GPU in basic display tasks. Support for both DDR4 and DDR5 memory provides flexibility in system design. The 10 nm process and Gracemont cores target efficiency rather than peak performance.

The market segments confirm this split: the EPYC 7F52 is classified as Server/Workstation, while the Atom x7835RE is Mobile. The socket types also reflect different design goals: the EPYC 7F52 uses the scalable AMD Socket SP3, while the Atom uses the embedded Intel BGA 1264.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every specification field. Core count: 16 versus 8. Thread count: 32 versus 8. Base clock: 3.50 GHz versus 1.30 GHz. Boost clock: 3.90 GHz versus 3.60 GHz. TDP: 240 W versus 12 W. Socket: AMD Socket SP3 versus Intel BGA 1264. Architecture: Zen 2 versus Amston Lake. Codename: Rome versus Amston Lake. Generation: EPYC (Zen 2 (Rome)) versus Atom (Gracemont). Process node: 7 nm versus 10 nm. Foundry: TSMC versus Intel.

Cache differences are pronounced. L1 is identical at 96 KB per core. L2 is 512 KB per core on the EPYC 7F52 versus 2 MB per module on the Atom. L3 is 256 MB shared versus 6 MB shared. Transistor count and die size are recorded for the EPYC 7F52 (3,800 million and 74 mm²) but not for the Atom.

Memory support: DDR4 only versus DDR4 and DDR5. Memory bus: eight-channel versus single-channel. Memory bandwidth: 204.8 GB/s versus 38.4 GB/s. ECC: supported versus not supported. PCIe: Gen 4 versus Gen 3 with 9 lanes (CPU only). Integrated graphics: none versus UHD Graphics 32EU. Market segment: Server/Workstation versus Mobile. Release date: April 13, 2020 versus April 7, 2024. Part number: 100-000000140100-000000140WOF versus SRNER. The launch MSRP for the Atom x7835RE is $127; no MSRP is recorded for the EPYC 7F52.