Ultra 7 258V vs EPYC 75F3

VS

Aggregate performance score

EPYC 75F3
2021
32 cores / 64 threads, 280 Watt
43.13
+242%
Core Ultra 7 258V
2024
8 cores / 8 threads, 17 Watt
12.60

EPYC 75F3 outperforms Core Ultra 7 258V by a whopping 242% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing EPYC 75F3 and Core Ultra 7 258V processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking52615
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation6.30no data
Market segmentServerLaptop
SeriesAMD EPYCno data
Power efficiency14.5069.78
Architecture codenameMilan (2021−2023)Lunar Lake (2024)
Release date12 January 2021 (3 years ago)24 September 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$4,860no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

EPYC 75F3 and Core Ultra 7 258V 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)8 (Octa-Core)
Threads648
Base clock speed2.95 GHz2.2 GHz
Boost clock speed4 GHz4.8 GHz
Bus rateno data37 MHz
Multiplier29.5no data
L1 cache2 MB192 KB (per core)
L2 cache16 MB2.5 MB (per core)
L3 cache256 MB (shared)12 MB (shared)
Chip lithography7 nm+3 nm
Die size8x 81 mm2no data
Maximum core temperatureno data100 °C
Number of transistors33,200 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility+no data

Compatibility

Information on EPYC 75F3 and Core Ultra 7 258V 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 2833
Power consumption (TDP)280 Watt17 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 75F3 and Core Ultra 7 258V. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

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

Security technologies

EPYC 75F3 and Core Ultra 7 258V technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by EPYC 75F3 and Core Ultra 7 258V are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by EPYC 75F3 and Core Ultra 7 258V. 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/AArc 140V

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by EPYC 75F3 and Core Ultra 7 258V.

PCIe version4.05.0
PCI Express lanes1284

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 75F3 43.13
+242%
Ultra 7 258V 12.60

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 75F3 68505
+242%
Ultra 7 258V 20022

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 43.13 12.60
Recency 12 January 2021 24 September 2024
Physical cores 32 8
Threads 64 8
Chip lithography 7 nm 3 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 280 Watt 17 Watt

EPYC 75F3 has a 242.3% higher aggregate performance score, and 300% more physical cores and 700% more threads.

Ultra 7 258V, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, a 133.3% more advanced lithography process, and 1547.1% lower power consumption.

The EPYC 75F3 is our recommended choice as it beats the Core Ultra 7 258V in performance tests.

Be aware that EPYC 75F3 is a server/workstation processor while Core Ultra 7 258V is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between EPYC 75F3 and Core Ultra 7 258V, 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 75F3
EPYC 75F3
Intel Core Ultra 7 258V
Core Ultra 7 258V

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 75F3 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 14 votes

Rate Core Ultra 7 258V on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about EPYC 75F3 or Core Ultra 7 258V, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.