Athlon 3000G vs EPYC 9754

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

EPYC 9754
2023
128 cores / 256 threads, 360 Watt
63.67
+2190%
Athlon 3000G
2019
2 cores / 4 threads, 35 Watt
2.78

EPYC 9754 outperforms Athlon 3000G by a whopping 2190% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing EPYC 9754 and Athlon 3000G processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking141736
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.125.27
Market segmentServerDesktop processor
Seriesno dataAMD Athlon
Power efficiency16.847.56
Architecture codenameBergamo (2023)Zen+ (2018−2019)
Release date13 June 2023 (1 year ago)21 November 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$11,900$49

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Athlon 3000G has 371% better value for money than EPYC 9754.

Detailed specifications

EPYC 9754 and Athlon 3000G 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 cores1282 (Dual-core)
Threads2564
Base clock speed2.25 GHz3.5 GHz
Boost clock speed3.1 GHz3.5 GHz
Bus typeno dataPCIe 3.0
Multiplierno data35
L1 cache64 KB (per core)96K (per core)
L2 cache1 MB (per core)512K (per core)
L3 cache256 MB (shared)4 MB (shared)
Chip lithography5 nm14 nm
Die size8x 73 mm2209.78 mm2?
Number of transistors71,000 million4,800 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibilityno data+
Unlocked multiplier-+

Compatibility

Information on EPYC 9754 and Athlon 3000G 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 (Uniprocessor)
SocketSP5AM4
Power consumption (TDP)360 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 9754 and Athlon 3000G. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

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

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by EPYC 9754 and Athlon 3000G are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by EPYC 9754 and Athlon 3000G. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR5DDR4 Dual-channel
Maximum memory sizeno data64 GB?
Maximum memory bandwidthno data42.671 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardN/AAMD Radeon Vega 3

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by EPYC 9754 and Athlon 3000G.

PCIe version5.03.0
PCI Express lanes1286

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.

EPYC 9754 63.67
+2190%
Athlon 3000G 2.78

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 9754 102135
+2191%
Athlon 3000G 4458

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 9754 1603
+66.6%
Athlon 3000G 962

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 9754 15552
+686%
Athlon 3000G 1979

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 63.67 2.78
Recency 13 June 2023 21 November 2019
Physical cores 128 2
Threads 256 4
Chip lithography 5 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 360 Watt 35 Watt

EPYC 9754 has a 2190.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, 6300% more physical cores and 6300% more threads, and a 180% more advanced lithography process.

Athlon 3000G, on the other hand, has 928.6% lower power consumption.

The EPYC 9754 is our recommended choice as it beats the Athlon 3000G in performance tests.

Be aware that EPYC 9754 is a server/workstation processor while Athlon 3000G is a desktop one.

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 9754
EPYC 9754
AMD Athlon 3000G
Athlon 3000G

Other comparisons

We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


3.7 40 votes

Rate EPYC 9754 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 2184 votes

Rate Athlon 3000G on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about processors EPYC 9754 and Athlon 3000G, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report bugs or inaccuracies on the site.