EPYC 7551P vs Ryzen 9 PRO 3900

VS

Aggregate performance score

Ryzen 9 PRO 3900
2019
12 cores / 24 threads, 65 Watt
19.90
EPYC 7551P
2017
32 cores / 64 threads, 180 Watt
24.00
+20.6%

EPYC 7551P outperforms Ryzen 9 PRO 3900 by a significant 21% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Ryzen 9 PRO 3900 and EPYC 7551P processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking280208
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data4.02
Market segmentDesktop processorServer
SeriesAMD Ryzen 9AMD EPYC
Power efficiency28.9712.62
Architecture codenameZen 2 (2017−2020)Naples (2017−2018)
Release date30 September 2019 (5 years ago)29 June 2017 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$2,100

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Ryzen 9 PRO 3900 and EPYC 7551P 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 cores12 (Dodeca-Core)32 (Dotriaconta-Core)
Threads2464
Base clock speed3.1 GHz2 GHz
Boost clock speed4.3 GHz3 GHz
Multiplierno data20
L1 cache768 KB96K (per core)
L2 cache6 MB512K (per core)
L3 cache64 MB64 MB (shared)
Chip lithography7 nm, 12 nm14 nm
Die sizeno data192 mm2
Number of transistorsno data4,800 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility+-
Unlocked multiplier-+

Compatibility

Information on Ryzen 9 PRO 3900 and EPYC 7551P 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 configuration1 (Uniprocessor)1 (Uniprocessor)
SocketSocket AM4TR4
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt180 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 9 PRO 3900 and EPYC 7551P. 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 7551P are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 9 PRO 3900 and EPYC 7551P. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-3200DDR4 Eight-channel
Maximum memory size128 GB2 TiB
Max memory channels28
Maximum memory bandwidth51.196 GB/s170.671 GB/s
ECC memory support-+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 9 PRO 3900 and EPYC 7551P.

PCIe versionno data3.0
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.

Ryzen 9 PRO 3900 19.90
EPYC 7551P 24.00
+20.6%

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.

Ryzen 9 PRO 3900 31616
EPYC 7551P 38126
+20.6%

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.

Ryzen 9 PRO 3900 1679
+80.3%
EPYC 7551P 931

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.

Ryzen 9 PRO 3900 9099
+46.9%
EPYC 7551P 6192

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 19.90 24.00
Recency 30 September 2019 29 June 2017
Physical cores 12 32
Threads 24 64
Chip lithography 7 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 180 Watt

Ryzen 9 PRO 3900 has an age advantage of 2 years, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 176.9% lower power consumption.

EPYC 7551P, on the other hand, has a 20.6% higher aggregate performance score, and 166.7% more physical cores and 166.7% more threads.

The EPYC 7551P is our recommended choice as it beats the Ryzen 9 PRO 3900 in performance tests.

Note that Ryzen 9 PRO 3900 is a desktop processor while EPYC 7551P is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 9 PRO 3900 and EPYC 7551P, 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 Ryzen 9 PRO 3900
Ryzen 9 PRO 3900
AMD EPYC 7551P
EPYC 7551P

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.


4.9 52 votes

Rate Ryzen 9 PRO 3900 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 78 votes

Rate EPYC 7551P on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Ryzen 9 PRO 3900 or EPYC 7551P, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.