Ultra 9 295HX vs EPYC 73F3
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 239 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 5.83 | no data |
| Market segment | Server | Laptop |
| Series | AMD EPYC | no data |
| Power efficiency | 4.63 | no data |
| Designer | AMD | Intel |
| Manufacturer | TSMC | no data |
| Architecture codename | Milan (2021−2023) | Arrow Lake-HX (2025) |
| Release date | 12 January 2021 (5 years ago) | no data |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $3,521 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
Basic parameters of EPYC 73F3 and Core Ultra 9 295HX: 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 | 16 (Hexadeca-Core) | 24 (Tetracosa-Core) |
| Threads | 32 | 24 |
| Base clock speed | 3.5 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 4 GHz | 2.1 GHz |
| Multiplier | 35 | no data |
| L1 cache | 1 MB | no data |
| L2 cache | 8 MB | no data |
| L3 cache | 256 MB (shared) | no data |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm+ | no data |
| Die size | 8x 81 mm2 | no data |
| Number of transistors | 33,200 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | - |
| Windows 11 compatibility | + | no data |
Compatibility
Information on EPYC 73F3 and Core Ultra 9 295HX 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 | 2 | no data |
| Socket | SP3 | no data |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 240 Watt | 55 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 73F3 and Core Ultra 9 295HX. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | - |
| AVX | + | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by EPYC 73F3 and Core Ultra 9 295HX are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by EPYC 73F3 and Core Ultra 9 295HX. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4-3200 | no data |
| Maximum memory size | 4 TiB | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 204.795 GB/s | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | N/A | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by EPYC 73F3 and Core Ultra 9 295HX.
| PCIe version | 4.0 | no data |
| PCI Express lanes | 128 | no data |
Pros & cons summary
| Physical cores | 16 | 24 |
| Threads | 32 | 24 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 240 Watt | 55 Watt |
EPYC 73F3 has 33% more threads.
Ultra 9 295HX, on the other hand, has 50% more physical cores, and 336% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between AMD EPYC 73F3 and Intel Core Ultra 9 295HX. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that EPYC 73F3 is a server/workstation processor while Core Ultra 9 295HX is a notebook one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
