EPYC 9275F vs Apple M2
Aggregate performance score
EPYC 9275F outperforms Apple M2 by a whopping 484% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing M2 and EPYC 9275F processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 830 | 27 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 13.08 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Server |
| Series | Apple Apple M-Series | no data |
| Power efficiency | 44.41 | 16.21 |
| Architecture codename | no data | Turin (2024) |
| Release date | 10 June 2022 (2 years ago) | 10 October 2024 (less than a year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $3,439 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
M2 and EPYC 9275F 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 | 8 (Octa-Core) | 24 (Tetracosa-Core) |
| Threads | 8 | 48 |
| Base clock speed | 2.424 GHz | 4.1 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.48 GHz | 4.8 GHz |
| L1 cache | 2 MB | 80 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 20 MB | 1 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | no data | 256 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 4 nm |
| Die size | no data | 8x 70.6 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 20000 Million | 66,520 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
Compatibility
Information on M2 and EPYC 9275F 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 | no data | 2 |
| Socket | no data | SP5 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 20 Watt | 320 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by M2 and EPYC 9275F. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| Precision Boost 2 | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by M2 and EPYC 9275F are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by M2 and EPYC 9275F. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR5 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Apple M2 10-Core GPU ( - 1398 MHz) | N/A |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by M2 and EPYC 9275F.
| PCIe version | no data | 5.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 128 |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.
Passmark
Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 9.32 | 54.43 |
| Recency | 10 June 2022 | 10 October 2024 |
| Physical cores | 8 | 24 |
| Threads | 8 | 48 |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 4 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 20 Watt | 320 Watt |
Apple M2 has 1500% lower power consumption.
EPYC 9275F, on the other hand, has a 484% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, 200% more physical cores and 500% more threads, and a 25% more advanced lithography process.
The EPYC 9275F is our recommended choice as it beats the M2 in performance tests.
Be aware that Apple M2 is a notebook processor while EPYC 9275F is a server/workstation one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Apple M2 and EPYC 9275F, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
