EPYC 7D13 vs Ultra 3 205
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Server |
| Designer | Intel | AMD |
| Manufacturer | TSMC | TSMC |
| Architecture codename | Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025) | Milan (2021−2023) |
| Release date | August 2025 (recently) | 10 November 2021 (3 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $140 | no data |
Detailed specifications
Core Ultra 3 205 and EPYC 7D13 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) | 36 |
| Threads | 8 | 72 |
| Base clock speed | 3.8 GHz | 0.7 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4.9 GHz | 3.2 GHz |
| L1 cache | 192 KB (per core) | 64 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 3 MB (per core) | 512 KB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 15 MB (shared) | 192 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 3 nm | 7 nm |
| Die size | 243 mm2 | 6x 81 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 17,800 million | 24,900 million |
| 64 bit support | + | - |
Compatibility
Information on Core Ultra 3 205 and EPYC 7D13 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 | 1 |
| Socket | 1851 | SP3 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 57 Watt | 95 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core Ultra 3 205 and EPYC 7D13. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| Precision Boost 2 | no data | + |
Security technologies
Core Ultra 3 205 and EPYC 7D13 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core Ultra 3 205 and EPYC 7D13 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
| VT-d | + | no data |
| VT-x | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core Ultra 3 205 and EPYC 7D13. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR5 | DDR4 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 16EU | N/A |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core Ultra 3 205 and EPYC 7D13.
| PCIe version | 5.0 | 4.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 24 | 29 |
Pros & cons summary
| Physical cores | 8 | 36 |
| Threads | 8 | 72 |
| Chip lithography | 3 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 57 Watt | 95 Watt |
Ultra 3 205 has a 133.3% more advanced lithography process, and 66.7% lower power consumption.
EPYC 7D13, on the other hand, has 350% more physical cores and 800% more threads.
We couldn't decide between Intel Core Ultra 3 205 and AMD EPYC 7D13. We've got no test results to judge.
Note that Core Ultra 3 205 is a desktop processor while EPYC 7D13 is a server/workstation one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
