Performance per price, higher is better.
AMD EPYC 7662 vs EPYC 7H12
Combined performance score
EPYC 7662 outperforms EPYC 7H12 by 5% in our combined benchmark results.
General info
Comparing EPYC 7H12 and EPYC 7662 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
Place in performance ranking | 39 | 34 |
Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
Value for money | 5.01 | no data |
Market segment | Server | Server |
Series | AMD EPYC | AMD EPYC |
Architecture codename | Zen 2 (2019−2020) | Zen 2 (2019−2020) |
Release date | 18 September 2019 (4 years old) | 19 February 2020 (4 years old) |
Current price | $6796 | no data |
Technical specs
EPYC 7H12 and EPYC 7662 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 cores | 64 (Tetrahexaconta-Core) | 64 (Tetrahexaconta-Core) |
Threads | 128 | 128 |
Base clock speed | 2.6 GHz | 2 GHz |
Boost clock speed | 3.3 GHz | 3.3 GHz |
L1 cache | 96K (per core) | 4 MB |
L2 cache | 512K (per core) | 32 MB |
L3 cache | 256 MB (shared) | 256 MB |
Chip lithography | 7 nm, 14 nm | 7 nm, 14 nm |
Die size | 192 mm2 | no data |
Number of transistors | 4,800 million | no data |
64 bit support | + | + |
Windows 11 compatibility | + | + |
Unlocked multiplier | Yes | No |
Compatibility
Information on EPYC 7H12 and EPYC 7662 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 configuration | 2 (Multiprocessor) | no data |
Socket | TR4 | Socket SP3 |
Power consumption (TDP) | 280 Watt | 225 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 7H12 and EPYC 7662. 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 7H12 and EPYC 7662 are enumerated here.
AMD-V | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by EPYC 7H12 and EPYC 7662. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
Supported memory types | DDR4 Eight-channel | DDR4-3200 |
Maximum memory size | 4 TiB | 4 TiB |
Max memory channels | 8 | 8 |
Maximum memory bandwidth | 204.763 GB/s | 204.763 GB/s |
ECC memory support | + | + |
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 7662 outperforms EPYC 7H12 by 5% in our combined 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 7662 outperforms EPYC 7H12 by 5% in Passmark.
Advantages and disadvantages
Performance score | 45.34 | 47.74 |
Recency | 18 September 2019 | 19 February 2020 |
Power consumption (TDP) | 280 Watt | 225 Watt |
We couldn't decide between EPYC 7H12 and EPYC 7662. The differences in performance seem too small.
Should you still have questions on choice between EPYC 7H12 and EPYC 7662, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.