EPYC 9174F vs EPYC 7402P

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

EPYC 7402P
2019
24 cores / 48 threads, 180 Watt
28.39
EPYC 9174F
2022
16 cores / 32 threads, 320 Watt
35.87
+26.3%

EPYC 9174F outperforms EPYC 7402P by a significant 26% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing EPYC 7402P and EPYC 9174F processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking15487
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation4.9511.32
Market segmentServerServer
SeriesAMD EPYCAMD EPYC
Architecture codenameZen 2 (2019−2020)Genoa
Release date7 August 2019 (4 years ago)10 November 2022 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,250$3,850
Current price$4315 (3.5x MSRP)$2950 (0.8x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

EPYC 9174F has 129% better value for money than EPYC 7402P.

Detailed specifications

EPYC 7402P and EPYC 9174F 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)16 (Hexadeca-Core)
Threads4832
Base clock speed2.8 GHz4.1 GHz
Boost clock speed3.35 GHz4.1 GHz
L1 cache1.5 MB1 MB
L2 cache12 MB16 MB
L3 cache128 MB (shared)256 MB (shared)
Chip lithography7 nm, 14 nm5 nm, 6 nm
Die size192 mm28x 72 mm2
Number of transistors4,800 million52,560 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility+no data
Unlocked multiplierYesNo

Compatibility

Information on EPYC 7402P and EPYC 9174F 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)180 Watt320 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 7402P and EPYC 9174F. 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 7402P and EPYC 9174F are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by EPYC 7402P and EPYC 9174F. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4 Eight-channelDDR5-4800
Maximum memory size4 TiB6 TiB
Maximum memory bandwidth204.763 GB/s460.8 GB/s

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by EPYC 7402P and EPYC 9174F.

PCIe versionno data5.0
PCI Express lanesno data128

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 7402P 28.39
EPYC 9174F 35.87
+26.3%

EPYC 9174F outperforms EPYC 7402P by 26% based on our aggregate 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 7402P 43905
EPYC 9174F 55485
+26.4%

EPYC 9174F outperforms EPYC 7402P by 26% 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 7402P 1190
EPYC 9174F 2217
+86.3%

EPYC 9174F outperforms EPYC 7402P by 86% 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 7402P 9541
EPYC 9174F 15484
+62.3%

EPYC 9174F outperforms EPYC 7402P by 62% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 28.39 35.87
Recency 7 August 2019 10 November 2022
Physical cores 24 16
Threads 48 32
Cost $1250 $3850
Chip lithography 7 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 180 Watt 320 Watt

The EPYC 9174F is our recommended choice as it beats the EPYC 7402P in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between EPYC 7402P and EPYC 9174F, 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 7402P
EPYC 7402P
AMD EPYC 9174F
EPYC 9174F

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.


4.7 6 votes

Rate EPYC 7402P on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5 1 vote

Rate EPYC 9174F on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about EPYC 7402P or EPYC 9174F, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.