Ultra 7 165H vs EPYC 74F3

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

EPYC 74F3
2021
24 cores / 48 threads, 240 Watt
38.19
+131%
Core Ultra 7 165H
2023
16 cores / 22 threads, 28 Watt
16.51

EPYC 74F3 outperforms Core Ultra 7 165H by a whopping 131% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing EPYC 74F3 and Core Ultra 7 165H processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking77402
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation11.21no data
Market segmentServerLaptop
SeriesAMD EPYCIntel Meteor Lake-H
Power efficiency15.0655.80
Architecture codenameMilan (2021−2023)Meteor Lake-H (2023)
Release date15 March 2021 (3 years ago)14 December 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$2,900$460

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

EPYC 74F3 and Core Ultra 7 165H 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)
Threads4822
Base clock speed2.8 GHz3.8 GHz
Boost clock speed4 GHz5 GHz
Multiplier32no data
L1 cache64 KB (per core)112 KB (per core)
L2 cache512 KB (per core)2 MB (per core)
L3 cache256 MB (shared)24 MB (shared)
Chip lithography7 nm+7 nm
Die size4x 81 mm2no data
Maximum core temperatureno data110 °C
Number of transistors33,200 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility+no data

Compatibility

Information on EPYC 74F3 and Core Ultra 7 165H 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 configuration21
SocketSP3Intel BGA 2049
Power consumption (TDP)240 Watt28 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 74F3 and Core Ultra 7 165H. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI++
AVX++
vProno data+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
TSX-+

Security technologies

EPYC 74F3 and Core Ultra 7 165H technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by EPYC 74F3 and Core Ultra 7 165H are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by EPYC 74F3 and Core Ultra 7 165H. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-3200DDR5
Maximum memory size4 TiBno data
Maximum memory bandwidth204.795 GB/sno data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardN/AIntel Arc 8-Cores iGPU ( - 2300 MHz)

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by EPYC 74F3 and Core Ultra 7 165H.

PCIe version4.05.0
PCI Express lanes1288

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 74F3 38.19
+131%
Ultra 7 165H 16.51

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.

EPYC 74F3 60666
+131%
Ultra 7 165H 26227

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 38.19 16.51
Recency 15 March 2021 14 December 2023
Physical cores 24 16
Threads 48 22
Power consumption (TDP) 240 Watt 28 Watt

EPYC 74F3 has a 131.3% higher aggregate performance score, and 50% more physical cores and 118.2% more threads.

Ultra 7 165H, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, and 757.1% lower power consumption.

The EPYC 74F3 is our recommended choice as it beats the Core Ultra 7 165H in performance tests.

Be aware that EPYC 74F3 is a server/workstation processor while Core Ultra 7 165H is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between EPYC 74F3 and Core Ultra 7 165H, 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 74F3
EPYC 74F3
Intel Core Ultra 7 165H
Core Ultra 7 165H

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.


5 2 votes

Rate EPYC 74F3 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 44 votes

Rate Core Ultra 7 165H on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about EPYC 74F3 or Core Ultra 7 165H, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.