EPYC 9654 vs EPYC 7401P

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

EPYC 7401P
2017
24 cores / 48 threads, 170 Watt
18.46
EPYC 9654
2022
96 cores / 192 threads, 360 Watt
78.98
+328%

EPYC 9654 outperforms EPYC 7401P by a whopping 328% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing EPYC 7401P and EPYC 9654 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking2954
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation33.9310.12
Market segmentServerServer
SeriesAMD EPYCAMD EPYC
Architecture codenameNaples (2017−2018)Genoa
Release date29 June 2017 (6 years ago)10 November 2022 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,075$11,805
Current price$212 (0.2x MSRP)$4544 (0.4x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

EPYC 7401P has 235% better value for money than EPYC 9654.

Detailed specifications

EPYC 7401P and EPYC 9654 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 cores24 (Tetracosa-Core)96
Threads48192
Base clock speed2 GHz2.4 GHz
Boost clock speed3 GHz3.7 GHz
L1 cache96K (per core)64K (per core)
L2 cache512K (per core)1 MB (per core)
L3 cache64 MB (shared)384 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm5 nm, 6 nm
Die size192 mm212x 72 mm2
Number of transistors4,800 million78,840 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data
Unlocked multiplierYesNo

Compatibility

Information on EPYC 7401P and EPYC 9654 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 configuration1 (Uniprocessor)2
SocketTR4SP5
Power consumption (TDP)170 Watt360 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 7401P and EPYC 9654. 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 7401P and EPYC 9654 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by EPYC 7401P and EPYC 9654. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4 Eight-channelDDR5-4800
Maximum memory size2 TiB6 TiB
Max memory channels8no data
Maximum memory bandwidth170.671 GB/s460.8 GB/s
ECC memory support+no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by EPYC 7401P and EPYC 9654.

PCIe version3.05.0
PCI Express lanes128128

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.

EPYC 7401P 18.46
EPYC 9654 78.98
+328%

EPYC 9654 outperforms EPYC 7401P by 328% based on our aggregated benchmark results.


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.

Benchmark coverage: 68%

EPYC 7401P 28546
EPYC 9654 122164
+328%

EPYC 9654 outperforms EPYC 7401P by 328% in Passmark.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 42%

EPYC 7401P 787
EPYC 9654 1823
+132%

EPYC 9654 outperforms EPYC 7401P by 132% in GeekBench 5 Single-Core.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 42%

EPYC 7401P 4666
EPYC 9654 18430
+295%

EPYC 9654 outperforms EPYC 7401P by 295% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 18.46 78.98
Recency 29 June 2017 10 November 2022
Physical cores 24 96
Threads 48 192
Cost $1075 $11805
Chip lithography 14 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 170 Watt 360 Watt

The EPYC 9654 is our recommended choice as it beats the EPYC 7401P in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between EPYC 7401P and EPYC 9654, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

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 EPYC 7401P
EPYC 7401P
AMD EPYC 9654
EPYC 9654

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

Community ratings

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


3.8 11 votes

Rate EPYC 7401P on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 982 votes

Rate EPYC 9654 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about EPYC 7401P or EPYC 9654, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.