Ryzen 7 253 vs EPYC 9474F
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 34 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 4.05 | no data |
| Market segment | Server | Laptop |
| Series | AMD EPYC | AMD Hawk Point (Zen 4/4c) |
| Power efficiency | 6.82 | no data |
| Designer | AMD | AMD |
| Manufacturer | TSMC | no data |
| Architecture codename | Genoa (2022−2023) | Hawk Point-H (Zen 4) (2024−2026) |
| Release date | 10 November 2022 (3 years ago) | 2 June 2026 (less than a year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $6,780 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Performance to price scatter graph
Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.
Detailed specifications
Basic parameters of EPYC 9474F and Ryzen 7 253: 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 | 48 (Octatetraconta-Core) | 8 (Octa-Core) |
| Threads | 96 | 16 |
| Base clock speed | 3.6 GHz | 3.6 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4.1 GHz | 4.9 GHz |
| Multiplier | 36 | no data |
| L1 cache | 64K (per core) | 512 KB |
| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 8 MB |
| L3 cache | 256 MB (shared) | 16 MB |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm, 6 nm | 4 nm |
| Die size | 8x 72 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 100 °C |
| Number of transistors | 52,560 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
Compatibility
Information on EPYC 9474F and Ryzen 7 253 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 | no data |
| Socket | SP5 | FP7r2/FP8 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 360 Watt | no data |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 9474F and Ryzen 7 253. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | USB 4, AVX, AVX2, AVX512, FMA3, MMX (+), SHA, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, SSE4A |
| AES-NI | + | - |
| AVX | + | + |
| Precision Boost 2 | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by EPYC 9474F and Ryzen 7 253 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by EPYC 9474F and Ryzen 7 253. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR5-4800 | DDR5 |
| Maximum memory size | 6 TiB | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 460.8 GB/s | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | AMD Radeon 780M ( - 2500 MHz) |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by EPYC 9474F and Ryzen 7 253.
| PCIe version | 5.0 | no data |
| PCI Express lanes | 128 | no data |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 10 November 2022 | 2 June 2026 |
| Physical cores | 48 | 8 |
| Threads | 96 | 16 |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 4 nm |
EPYC 9474F has 500% more physical cores and 500% more threads.
Ryzen 7 253, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, and a 25% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between AMD EPYC 9474F and AMD Ryzen 7 253. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that EPYC 9474F is a server/workstation processor while Ryzen 7 253 is a notebook one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
