EPYC 7F32 vs Ryzen Threadripper 1950X

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Ryzen Threadripper 1950X
2017
16 cores / 32 threads, 180 Watt
17.43
+19.6%
EPYC 7F32
2020
8 cores / 16 threads, 180 Watt
14.57

Ryzen Threadripper 1950X outperforms EPYC 7F32 by a significant 20% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Ryzen Threadripper 1950X and EPYC 7F32 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking364494
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation5.043.67
Market segmentDesktop processorServer
SeriesAMD Ryzen ThreadripperAMD EPYC
Power efficiency9.167.66
Architecture codenameZen (2017−2020)Zen 2 (2017−2020)
Release date10 August 2017 (7 years ago)14 April 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$999$2,100

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Ryzen Threadripper 1950X has 37% better value for money than EPYC 7F32.

Detailed specifications

Ryzen Threadripper 1950X and EPYC 7F32 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 cores16 (Hexadeca-Core)8 (Octa-Core)
Threads3216
Base clock speed3.4 GHz3.7 GHz
Boost clock speed4 GHz3.9 GHz
Bus rate4 × 8 GT/sno data
Multiplier3437
L1 cache96K (per core)96K (per core)
L2 cache512K (per core)512K (per core)
L3 cache32 MB128 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm7 nm, 14 nm
Die size213 mm274 mm2
Maximum core temperature68 °Cno data
Number of transistors9,600 million3,800 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplier++

Compatibility

Information on Ryzen Threadripper 1950X and EPYC 7F32 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
SocketSP3r2SP3
Power consumption (TDP)180 Watt180 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen Threadripper 1950X and EPYC 7F32. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsSSE4.2, SSE4A, AMD-V, AES, AVX2, FMA3, SHAno data
AES-NI++
AVX++
Precision Boost 2no data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen Threadripper 1950X and EPYC 7F32 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen Threadripper 1950X and EPYC 7F32. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4 Quad-channelDDR4-3200
Maximum memory size2 TiB4 TiB
Max memory channels48
Maximum memory bandwidth85.33 GB/s204.763 GB/s
ECC memory support++

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen Threadripper 1950X and EPYC 7F32.

PCIe version3.04.0
PCI Express lanes60no data

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 Threadripper 1950X 17.43
+19.6%
EPYC 7F32 14.57

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 Threadripper 1950X 27684
+19.6%
EPYC 7F32 23142

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 17.43 14.57
Recency 10 August 2017 14 April 2020
Physical cores 16 8
Threads 32 16
Chip lithography 14 nm 7 nm

Ryzen Threadripper 1950X has a 19.6% higher aggregate performance score, and 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.

EPYC 7F32, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

The Ryzen Threadripper 1950X is our recommended choice as it beats the EPYC 7F32 in performance tests.

Note that Ryzen Threadripper 1950X is a desktop processor while EPYC 7F32 is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen Threadripper 1950X and EPYC 7F32, 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 Threadripper 1950X
Ryzen Threadripper 1950X
AMD EPYC 7F32
EPYC 7F32

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.


3.9 156 votes

Rate Ryzen Threadripper 1950X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 3 votes

Rate EPYC 7F32 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Ryzen Threadripper 1950X or EPYC 7F32, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.