Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS vs EPYC 7702

Aggregate performance score

EPYC 7702
2019
64 cores / 128 threads, 200 Watt
45.81
+149%
Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS
2023
8 cores / 16 threads, 35 Watt
18.42

EPYC 7702 outperforms Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS by a whopping 149% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing EPYC 7702 and Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking44342
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation4.00no data
Market segmentServerLaptop
SeriesAMD EPYCAMD Phoenix (Zen 4, Ryzen 7040)
Power efficiency20.8947.99
Architecture codenameZen 2 (2017−2020)Phoenix-HS (Zen 4) (2023)
Release date7 August 2019 (5 years ago)13 June 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$6,450no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

EPYC 7702 and Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS 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 cores64 (Tetrahexaconta-Core)8 (Octa-Core)
Threads12816
Base clock speed2 GHz4 GHz
Boost clock speed3.35 GHz5.2 GHz
Multiplier20no data
L1 cache4 MB512 KB
L2 cache32 MB8 MB
L3 cache256 MB (shared)16 MB
Chip lithography7 nm, 14 nm4 nm
Die size192 mm2178 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data100 °C
Number of transistors4,800 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility+no data
Unlocked multiplier+-

Compatibility

Information on EPYC 7702 and Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS 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 configuration2 (Multiprocessor)no data
SocketTR4FP7/FP8
Power consumption (TDP)200 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 7702 and Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI+-
AVX+-
Precision Boost 2+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by EPYC 7702 and Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by EPYC 7702 and Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4 Eight-channelno data
Maximum memory size4 TiBno data
Max memory channels8no data
Maximum memory bandwidth204.763 GB/sno data
ECC memory support+-

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataAMD Radeon 780M

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 7702 45.81
+149%
Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS 18.42

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 7702 70107
+149%
Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS 28187

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.

EPYC 7702 1178
Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS 2296
+94.9%

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.

EPYC 7702 11708
+7.9%
Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS 10846

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 45.81 18.42
Recency 7 August 2019 13 June 2023
Physical cores 64 8
Threads 128 16
Chip lithography 7 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 200 Watt 35 Watt

EPYC 7702 has a 148.7% higher aggregate performance score, and 700% more physical cores and 700% more threads.

Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, a 75% more advanced lithography process, and 471.4% lower power consumption.

The EPYC 7702 is our recommended choice as it beats the Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS in performance tests.

Be aware that EPYC 7702 is a server/workstation processor while Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between EPYC 7702 and Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS, 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 7702
EPYC 7702
AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS
Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS

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.


4.6 28 votes

Rate EPYC 7702 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.4 45 votes

Rate Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about EPYC 7702 or Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.