EPYC 9474F vs EPYC 7532

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

EPYC 7532
2020
32 cores / 64 threads, 200 Watt
34.30
EPYC 9474F
2022
48 cores / 96 threads, 360 Watt
67.89
+97.9%

EPYC 9474F outperforms EPYC 7532 by an impressive 98% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing EPYC 7532 and EPYC 9474F processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking989
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation38.459.75
Market segmentServerServer
SeriesAMD EPYCAMD EPYC
Architecture codenameZen 2 (2019−2020)Genoa
Release date19 February 2020 (4 years ago)10 November 2022 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$6,780
Current price$800 $3950 (0.6x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

EPYC 7532 has 294% better value for money than EPYC 9474F.

Detailed specifications

EPYC 7532 and EPYC 9474F 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 cores32 (Dotriaconta-Core)48 (Octatetraconta-Core)
Threads6496
Base clock speed2.4 GHz3.6 GHz
Boost clock speed3.3 GHz4.1 GHz
L1 cache2 MB64K (per core)
L2 cache16 MB1 MB (per core)
L3 cache256 MB256 MB (shared)
Chip lithography7 nm, 14 nm5 nm, 6 nm
Die sizeno data8x 72 mm2
Number of transistorsno data52,560 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility+no data
Unlocked multiplierNoNo

Compatibility

Information on EPYC 7532 and EPYC 9474F 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 configurationno data2
SocketSocket SP3SP5
Power consumption (TDP)200 Watt360 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 7532 and EPYC 9474F. 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 7532 and EPYC 9474F are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by EPYC 7532 and EPYC 9474F. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-3200DDR5-4800
Maximum memory size4 TiB6 TiB
Max memory channels8no data
Maximum memory bandwidth204.763 GB/s460.8 GB/s
ECC memory support+no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by EPYC 7532 and EPYC 9474F.

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 7532 34.30
EPYC 9474F 67.89
+97.9%

EPYC 9474F outperforms EPYC 7532 by 98% 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 7532 53051
EPYC 9474F 105003
+97.9%

EPYC 9474F outperforms EPYC 7532 by 98% in Passmark.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 34.30 67.89
Recency 19 February 2020 10 November 2022
Physical cores 32 48
Threads 64 96
Chip lithography 7 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 200 Watt 360 Watt

The EPYC 9474F is our recommended choice as it beats the EPYC 7532 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between EPYC 7532 and EPYC 9474F, 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 7532
EPYC 7532
AMD EPYC 9474F
EPYC 9474F

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.


4.3 18 votes

Rate EPYC 7532 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 19 votes

Rate EPYC 9474F on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about EPYC 7532 or EPYC 9474F, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.