Ryzen 5 7500F vs EPYC 9454P

VS

Aggregate performance score

EPYC 9454P
2022
48 cores / 96 threads, 290 Watt
60.35
+255%
Ryzen 5 7500F
2023
6 cores / 12 threads, 65 Watt
16.98

EPYC 9454P outperforms Ryzen 5 7500F by a whopping 255% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing EPYC 9454P and Ryzen 5 7500F processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking15379
Place by popularitynot in top-10013
Cost-effectiveness evaluation9.0766.13
Market segmentServerDesktop processor
SeriesAMD EPYCno data
Power efficiency19.6924.72
Architecture codenameGenoa (2022−2023)Raphael (2023−2024)
Release date10 November 2022 (2 years ago)22 July 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$4,598$179

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Ryzen 5 7500F has 629% better value for money than EPYC 9454P.

Detailed specifications

EPYC 9454P and Ryzen 5 7500F 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 cores48 (Octatetraconta-Core)6 (Hexa-Core)
Threads9612
Base clock speed2.75 GHz3.7 GHz
Boost clock speed3.8 GHz5 GHz
Multiplier27.5no data
L1 cache64K (per core)64 KB (per core)
L2 cache1 MB (per core)1 MB (per core)
L3 cache256 MB (shared)32 MB (shared)
Chip lithography5 nm, 6 nm5 nm
Die size8x 72 mm271 mm2
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data61 °C
Number of transistors52,560 million6,570 million
64 bit support++
Unlocked multiplier-+

Compatibility

Information on EPYC 9454P and Ryzen 5 7500F 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 configuration11
SocketSP5AM5
Power consumption (TDP)290 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 9454P and Ryzen 5 7500F. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI++
AVX++
Precision Boost 2++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by EPYC 9454P and Ryzen 5 7500F are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by EPYC 9454P and Ryzen 5 7500F. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR5-4800DDR5-5200
Maximum memory size6 TiBno data
Maximum memory bandwidth460.8 GB/sno data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataN/A

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by EPYC 9454P and Ryzen 5 7500F.

PCIe version5.05.0
PCI Express lanes12824

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 9454P 60.35
+255%
Ryzen 5 7500F 16.98

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 9454P 95863
+255%
Ryzen 5 7500F 26972

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 9454P 1963
Ryzen 5 7500F 2742
+39.7%

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 9454P 18796
+49.1%
Ryzen 5 7500F 12607

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 60.35 16.98
Recency 10 November 2022 22 July 2023
Physical cores 48 6
Threads 96 12
Power consumption (TDP) 290 Watt 65 Watt

EPYC 9454P has a 255.4% higher aggregate performance score, and 700% more physical cores and 700% more threads.

Ryzen 5 7500F, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 8 months, and 346.2% lower power consumption.

The EPYC 9454P is our recommended choice as it beats the Ryzen 5 7500F in performance tests.

Be aware that EPYC 9454P is a server/workstation processor while Ryzen 5 7500F is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between EPYC 9454P and Ryzen 5 7500F, 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 9454P
EPYC 9454P
AMD Ryzen 5 7500F
Ryzen 5 7500F

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.


3.4 10 votes

Rate EPYC 9454P on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.5 3026 votes

Rate Ryzen 5 7500F on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about EPYC 9454P or Ryzen 5 7500F, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.