EPYC 75F3 vs FX-4170

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

FX-4170
2012
4 cores / 4 threads, 125 Watt
1.98
EPYC 75F3
2021
32 cores / 64 threads, 280 Watt
44.76
+2161%

EPYC 75F3 outperforms FX-4170 by a whopping 2161% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing FX-4170 and EPYC 75F3 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking195550
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data5.93
Market segmentDesktop processorServer
Seriesno dataAMD EPYC
Power efficiency1.4414.58
Architecture codenameZambezi (2011−2012)Milan (2021−2023)
Release date27 February 2012 (12 years ago)12 January 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$4,860

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

FX-4170 and EPYC 75F3 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)32 (Dotriaconta-Core)
Threads464
Base clock speed4.2 GHz2.95 GHz
Boost clock speed4.3 GHz4 GHz
Multiplierno data29.5
L1 cache192 KB2 MB
L2 cache4096 KB16 MB
L3 cache8192 KB256 MB (shared)
Chip lithography32 nm7 nm+
Die size315 mm28x 81 mm2
Maximum core temperature61 °Cno data
Number of transistors1,200 million33,200 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
P0 Vcore voltageMin: 1.1875 V - Max: 1.4125 Vno data

Compatibility

Information on FX-4170 and EPYC 75F3 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 configuration12
SocketAM3+SP3
Power consumption (TDP)125 Watt280 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-4170 and EPYC 75F3. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI++
FMA+-
AVX++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by FX-4170 and EPYC 75F3 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-4170 and EPYC 75F3. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR4-3200
Maximum memory sizeno data4 TiB
Maximum memory bandwidthno data204.795 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataN/A

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FX-4170 and EPYC 75F3.

PCIe versionn/a4.0
PCI Express lanesno data128

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.

FX-4170 1.98
EPYC 75F3 44.76
+2161%

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.

FX-4170 3034
EPYC 75F3 68505
+2158%

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.

FX-4170 464
EPYC 75F3 1826
+294%

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.

FX-4170 1201
EPYC 75F3 16432
+1268%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.98 44.76
Recency 27 February 2012 12 January 2021
Physical cores 4 32
Threads 4 64
Chip lithography 32 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 125 Watt 280 Watt

FX-4170 has 124% lower power consumption.

EPYC 75F3, on the other hand, has a 2160.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, 700% more physical cores and 1500% more threads, and a 357.1% more advanced lithography process.

The EPYC 75F3 is our recommended choice as it beats the FX-4170 in performance tests.

Note that FX-4170 is a desktop processor while EPYC 75F3 is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between FX-4170 and EPYC 75F3, 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 FX-4170
FX-4170
AMD EPYC 75F3
EPYC 75F3

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.


4.4 78 votes

Rate FX-4170 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5 2 votes

Rate EPYC 75F3 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about FX-4170 or EPYC 75F3, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.