EPYC 9384X vs Ryzen 7 5825C
Aggregate performance score
EPYC 9384X outperforms Ryzen 7 5825C by a whopping 395% 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 | 1030 | 81 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 5.86 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Server |
| Series | AMD Cezanne (Zen 3, Ryzen 5000) | no data |
| Power efficiency | 59.04 | 13.70 |
| Designer | AMD | AMD |
| Manufacturer | TSMC | TSMC |
| Architecture codename | Barcelo (Zen 3) (2022−2023) | Genoa-X (2023) |
| Release date | 5 May 2022 (3 years ago) | 13 June 2023 (2 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $5,529 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
Ryzen 7 5825C and EPYC 9384X 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) | 32 (Dotriaconta-Core) |
| Threads | 16 | 64 |
| Base clock speed | 2 GHz | 3.1 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4.5 GHz | 3.9 GHz |
| L1 cache | 64K (per core) | 64 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 512K (per core) | 1 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 16 MB (shared) | 768 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm | 5 nm |
| Die size | 180 mm2 | 8x 72 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 95 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 10,700 million | 90,160 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | + | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Ryzen 7 5825C and EPYC 9384X 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) | 15 Watt | 320 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 7 5825C and EPYC 9384X. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | XFR, FMA3, SSE 4.2, AVX2, SMT | no data |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| Precision Boost 2 | + | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 7 5825C and EPYC 9384X are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 7 5825C and EPYC 9384X. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4-3200 | DDR5 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | AMD Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) ( - 2000 MHz) | N/A |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 7 5825C and EPYC 9384X.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | 5.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 8 | 128 |
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 8.26 | 40.90 |
| Recency | 5 May 2022 | 13 June 2023 |
| Physical cores | 8 | 32 |
| Threads | 16 | 64 |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 320 Watt |
Ryzen 7 5825C has 2033.3% lower power consumption.
EPYC 9384X, on the other hand, has a 395.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads, and a 40% more advanced lithography process.
The AMD EPYC 9384X is our recommended choice as it beats the AMD Ryzen 7 5825C in performance tests.
Be aware that Ryzen 7 5825C is a notebook processor while EPYC 9384X 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.
