Ryzen 7 8840HX vs EPYC 7452
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 201 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 8.52 | no data |
| Market segment | Server | Laptop |
| Series | AMD EPYC | no data |
| Power efficiency | 17.36 | no data |
| Designer | AMD | AMD |
| Manufacturer | TSMC | TSMC |
| Architecture codename | Zen 2 (2017−2020) | Dragon Range (2025) |
| Release date | 7 August 2019 (5 years ago) | 23 April 2025 (recently) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $2,025 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
EPYC 7452 and Ryzen 7 8840HX 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 | 32 (Dotriaconta-Core) | 12 (Dodeca-Core) |
| Threads | 64 | 24 |
| Base clock speed | 2.2 GHz | 2.9 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.35 GHz | 5.1 GHz |
| Multiplier | 23.5 | no data |
| L1 cache | 96K (per core) | 64 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 512K (per core) | 1 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 128 MB (shared) | 64 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm, 14 nm | 5 nm |
| Die size | 192 mm2 | 2x 71 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 4,800 million | 13,140 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | + | no data |
| Unlocked multiplier | + | + |
Compatibility
Information on EPYC 7452 and Ryzen 7 8840HX 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 (Multiprocessor) | 1 |
| Socket | TR4 | FL1 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 155 Watt | 55 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 7452 and Ryzen 7 8840HX. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| Precision Boost 2 | + | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by EPYC 7452 and Ryzen 7 8840HX are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by EPYC 7452 and Ryzen 7 8840HX. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 Eight-channel | DDR5 |
| Maximum memory size | 4 TiB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 8 | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 204.763 GB/s | no data |
| ECC memory support | + | - |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | AMD Radeon 610M |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by EPYC 7452 and Ryzen 7 8840HX.
| PCIe version | no data | 5.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 28 |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 7 August 2019 | 23 April 2025 |
| Physical cores | 32 | 12 |
| Threads | 64 | 24 |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 155 Watt | 55 Watt |
EPYC 7452 has 166.7% more physical cores and 166.7% more threads.
Ryzen 7 8840HX, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 5 years, a 40% more advanced lithography process, and 181.8% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between AMD EPYC 7452 and AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that EPYC 7452 is a server/workstation processor while Ryzen 7 8840HX 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.
