EPYC 9275F vs Ryzen 7 4800H
Aggregate performance score
EPYC 9275F outperforms Ryzen 7 4800H by a whopping 373% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Ryzen 7 4800H and EPYC 9275F processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 687 | 26 |
| Place by popularity | 74 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 13.07 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Server |
| Series | AMD Renoir (Ryzen 4000 APU) | no data |
| Power efficiency | 24.38 | 16.21 |
| Architecture codename | Renoir-H (Zen 2) (2020) | Turin (2024) |
| Release date | 6 January 2020 (5 years ago) | 10 October 2024 (less than a year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $3,439 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Ryzen 7 4800H and EPYC 9275F 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 | 8 (Octa-Core) | 24 (Tetracosa-Core) |
| Threads | 16 | 48 |
| Base clock speed | 2.9 GHz | 4.1 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4.2 GHz | 4.8 GHz |
| Multiplier | 29 | no data |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 80 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 512 KB (per core) | 1 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 8 MB (shared) | 256 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm | 4 nm |
| Die size | 156 mm2 | 8x 70.6 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 105 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 9,800 million | 66,520 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | + | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Ryzen 7 4800H and EPYC 9275F 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 | FP6 | SP5 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 45 Watt | 320 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 7 4800H and EPYC 9275F. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, BMI2, ABM, FMA, ADX, SMEP, SMAP, SMT, CPB, AES-NI, RDRAND, RDSEED, SHA, SME | no data |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| FMA | + | - |
| AVX | + | + |
| Precision Boost 2 | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 7 4800H and EPYC 9275F are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 7 4800H and EPYC 9275F. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 | DDR5 |
| Maximum memory size | 64 GB | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 68.27 GB/s | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | AMD Radeon RX Vega 7 ( - 1600 MHz) | N/A |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 7 4800H and EPYC 9275F.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | 5.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 128 |
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 11.51 | 54.43 |
| Recency | 6 January 2020 | 10 October 2024 |
| Physical cores | 8 | 24 |
| Threads | 16 | 48 |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm | 4 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 45 Watt | 320 Watt |
Ryzen 7 4800H has 611.1% lower power consumption.
EPYC 9275F, on the other hand, has a 372.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, 200% more physical cores and 200% more threads, and a 75% more advanced lithography process.
The EPYC 9275F is our recommended choice as it beats the Ryzen 7 4800H in performance tests.
Be aware that Ryzen 7 4800H is a notebook processor while EPYC 9275F is a server/workstation one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 7 4800H and EPYC 9275F, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
