EPYC 7301 vs Ryzen 9 PRO 3900
Aggregate performance score
Ryzen 9 PRO 3900 outperforms EPYC 7301 by a whopping 109% 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 | 345 | 914 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 1.51 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Server |
| Series | AMD Ryzen 9 | AMD EPYC |
| Power efficiency | 28.94 | 5.29 |
| Designer | AMD | AMD |
| Architecture codename | Zen 2 (2017−2020) | Naples (2017−2018) |
| Release date | 30 September 2019 (5 years ago) | 29 June 2017 (7 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $825 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
Ryzen 9 PRO 3900 and EPYC 7301 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 | 12 (Dodeca-Core) | 16 (Hexadeca-Core) |
| Threads | 24 | 32 |
| Base clock speed | 3.1 GHz | 2.2 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4.3 GHz | 2.7 GHz |
| Multiplier | no data | 22 |
| L1 cache | 768 KB | 96K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 6 MB | 512K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 64 MB | 64 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm, 12 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | no data | 192 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | no data | 4,800 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | + | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Ryzen 9 PRO 3900 and EPYC 7301 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 (Uniprocessor) | 2 (Multiprocessor) |
| Socket | Socket AM4 | TR4 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 170 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 9 PRO 3900 and EPYC 7301. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| Precision Boost 2 | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 9 PRO 3900 and EPYC 7301 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 9 PRO 3900 and EPYC 7301. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4-3200 | DDR4 Eight-channel |
| Maximum memory size | 128 GB | 2 TiB |
| Max memory channels | 2 | 8 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 51.196 GB/s | 170.671 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 9 PRO 3900 and EPYC 7301.
| PCIe version | no data | 3.0 |
| 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.
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 | 19.50 | 9.32 |
| Recency | 30 September 2019 | 29 June 2017 |
| Physical cores | 12 | 16 |
| Threads | 24 | 32 |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 170 Watt |
Ryzen 9 PRO 3900 has a 109.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 161.5% lower power consumption.
EPYC 7301, on the other hand, has 33.3% more physical cores and 33.3% more threads.
The AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 3900 is our recommended choice as it beats the AMD EPYC 7301 in performance tests.
Note that Ryzen 9 PRO 3900 is a desktop processor while EPYC 7301 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.
