EPYC 7F72 vs Ryzen 3 3300X
Aggregate performance score
EPYC 7F72 outperforms Ryzen 3 3300X by a whopping 294% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 1077 | 173 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 27.05 | 9.41 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Server |
| Series | no data | AMD EPYC |
| Power efficiency | 4.97 | 5.30 |
| Designer | AMD | AMD |
| Manufacturer | TSMC | TSMC |
| Architecture codename | Matisse (Zen 2) (2019−2020) | Zen 2 (2017−2020) |
| Release date | 24 April 2020 (5 years ago) | 14 April 2020 (5 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $120 | $2,450 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Ryzen 3 3300X has 187% better value for money than EPYC 7F72.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
Ryzen 3 3300X and EPYC 7F72 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 | 4 (Quad-Core) | 24 (Tetracosa-Core) |
| Threads | 8 | 48 |
| Base clock speed | 3.8 GHz | 3.2 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4.3 GHz | 3.7 GHz |
| Multiplier | no data | 32 |
| L1 cache | 96K (per core) | 96K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 512K (per core) | 512K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 16 MB (shared) | 192 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm | 7 nm, 14 nm |
| Die size | 74 mm2 | 74 mm2 |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 95 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 3,800 million | 3,800 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
| Unlocked multiplier | + | + |
Compatibility
Information on Ryzen 3 3300X and EPYC 7F72 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 | 1 | 2 |
| Socket | AM4 | SP3 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 240 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 3 3300X and EPYC 7F72. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | 86x MMX(+), SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, SSE4A,-64, AMD-V, AES, AVX, AVX2, FMA3, SHA, Precision Boost 2 | no data |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| Precision Boost 2 | + | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 3 3300X and EPYC 7F72 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 3 3300X and EPYC 7F72. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4-3200 | DDR4-3200 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 4 TiB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 8 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 204.763 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 3 3300X and EPYC 7F72.
| PCIe version | 4.0 | 4.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 16 | no data |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
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. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 7.64 | 30.07 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 24 |
| Threads | 8 | 48 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 240 Watt |
Ryzen 3 3300X has 269.2% lower power consumption.
EPYC 7F72, on the other hand, has a 293.6% higher aggregate performance score, and 500% more physical cores and 500% more threads.
The AMD EPYC 7F72 is our recommended choice as it beats the AMD Ryzen 3 3300X in performance tests.
Note that Ryzen 3 3300X is a desktop processor while EPYC 7F72 is a server/workstation one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
