Ryzen 5 5600X vs EPYC 7F52

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

EPYC 7F52
2020
16 cores / 32 threads, 240 Watt
26.49
+85.2%

EPYC 7F52 outperforms Ryzen 5 5600X by an impressive 85% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing EPYC 7F52 and Ryzen 5 5600X processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking189529
Place by popularitynot in top-10017
Cost-effectiveness evaluation5.6426.59
Market segmentServerDesktop processor
SeriesAMD EPYCAMD Ryzen 5
Power efficiency10.0620.06
Architecture codenameZen 2 (2017−2020)Vermeer (Zen 3) (2020−2022)
Release date14 April 2020 (4 years ago)8 October 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$3,100$299

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Ryzen 5 5600X has 371% better value for money than EPYC 7F52.

Detailed specifications

EPYC 7F52 and Ryzen 5 5600X 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 cores16 (Hexadeca-Core)6 (Hexa-Core)
Threads3212
Base clock speed3.5 GHz3.7 GHz
Boost clock speed3.9 GHz4.6 GHz
Multiplier3537
L1 cache1 MB384 KB
L2 cache8 MB3 MB
L3 cache256 MB (shared)32 MB
Chip lithography7 nm, 14 nm7 nm, 12 nm
Die size74 mm22x 80.7 + 125 (I/O) mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data95 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data95 °C
Number of transistors3,800 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility++
Unlocked multiplier++

Compatibility

Information on EPYC 7F52 and Ryzen 5 5600X 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
SocketSP3AM4
Power consumption (TDP)240 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 7F52 and Ryzen 5 5600X. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataMMX (+), SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, SSE4A, AES, AVX, AVX2, FMA3, SHA
AES-NI++
AVX++
Precision Boost 2++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by EPYC 7F52 and Ryzen 5 5600X are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by EPYC 7F52 and Ryzen 5 5600X. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-3200DDR4
Maximum memory size4 TiB128 GB
Max memory channels82
Maximum memory bandwidth204.763 GB/s51.196 GB/s
ECC memory support+-

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by EPYC 7F52 and Ryzen 5 5600X.

PCIe version4.04.0

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 7F52 26.49
+85.2%
Ryzen 5 5600X 14.30

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 7F52 40534
+85.2%
Ryzen 5 5600X 21888

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 7F52 1412
Ryzen 5 5600X 2114
+49.7%

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 7F52 9811
+12.8%
Ryzen 5 5600X 8694

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 26.49 14.30
Recency 14 April 2020 8 October 2020
Physical cores 16 6
Threads 32 12
Power consumption (TDP) 240 Watt 65 Watt

EPYC 7F52 has a 85.2% higher aggregate performance score, and 166.7% more physical cores and 166.7% more threads.

Ryzen 5 5600X, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 5 months, and 269.2% lower power consumption.

The EPYC 7F52 is our recommended choice as it beats the Ryzen 5 5600X in performance tests.

Be aware that EPYC 7F52 is a server/workstation processor while Ryzen 5 5600X is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between EPYC 7F52 and Ryzen 5 5600X, 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 7F52
EPYC 7F52
AMD Ryzen 5 5600X
Ryzen 5 5600X

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.


4.1 9 votes

Rate EPYC 7F52 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.4 12834 votes

Rate Ryzen 5 5600X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about EPYC 7F52 or Ryzen 5 5600X, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.