EPYC 7313 vs E-350

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

E-350
2011
2 cores / 2 threads, 18 Watt
0.24
EPYC 7313
2021
16 cores / 32 threads, 155 Watt
22.09
+9104%

EPYC 7313 outperforms E-350 by a whopping 9104% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking3374282
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data15.64
Market segmentLaptopServer
SeriesAMD E-SeriesAMD EPYC
Power efficiency0.566.02
DesignerAMDAMD
Manufacturerno dataTSMC
Architecture codenameZacate (2011−2013)Milan (2021−2023)
Release date4 January 2011 (14 years ago)15 March 2021 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$1,083

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

Detailed specifications

E-350 and EPYC 7313 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 cores2 (Dual-core)16 (Hexadeca-Core)
Threads232
Base clock speedno data3 GHz
Boost clock speed1.6 GHz3.7 GHz
Multiplierno data30
L1 cache64K (per core)64 KB (per core)
L2 cache512K (per core)512 KB (per core)
L3 cache0 KB128 MB (shared)
Chip lithography40 nm7 nm+
Die size75 mm24x 81 mm2
Maximum core temperature90 °Cno data
Number of transistorsno data16,600 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+

Compatibility

Information on E-350 and EPYC 7313 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 configuration12
SocketFT1SP3
Power consumption (TDP)18 Watt155 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by E-350 and EPYC 7313. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsMMX (+), SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4Ano data
AES-NI-+
AVX-+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by E-350 and EPYC 7313 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by E-350 and EPYC 7313. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR4-3200
Maximum memory sizeno data4 TiB
Maximum memory bandwidthno data204.795 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon HD 6310N/A

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by E-350 and EPYC 7313.

PCIe versionno data4.0
PCI Express lanesno data128

Synthetic benchmarks

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.

E-350 0.24
EPYC 7313 22.09
+9104%

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. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.

E-350 429
Samples: 1034
EPYC 7313 38805
+8945%
Samples: 23

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

E-350 107
EPYC 7313 1471
+1275%

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

E-350 184
EPYC 7313 10956
+5854%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.24 22.09
Recency 4 January 2011 15 March 2021
Physical cores 2 16
Threads 2 32
Chip lithography 40 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 18 Watt 155 Watt

E-350 has 761.1% lower power consumption.

EPYC 7313, on the other hand, has a 9104.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, 700% more physical cores and 1500% more threads, and a 471.4% more advanced lithography process.

The AMD EPYC 7313 is our recommended choice as it beats the AMD E-350 in performance tests.

Be aware that E-350 is a notebook processor while EPYC 7313 is a server/workstation one.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


AMD E-350
E-350
AMD EPYC 7313
EPYC 7313

Other comparisons

We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


2.9 442 votes

Rate E-350 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 32 votes

Rate EPYC 7313 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about processors E-350 and EPYC 7313, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report bugs or inaccuracies on the site.