EPYC 7F52 vs Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX
Aggregate performance score
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX outperforms EPYC 7F52 by a significant 20% 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 | 205 | 272 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 21.29 | 4.97 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Server |
| Series | no data | AMD EPYC |
| Power efficiency | 8.64 | 10.49 |
| Designer | AMD | AMD |
| Manufacturer | TSMC | TSMC |
| Architecture codename | Storm Peak (2023) | Zen 2 (2017−2020) |
| Release date | 19 October 2023 (2 years ago) | 14 April 2020 (5 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $1,399 | $3,100 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX has 328% better value for money than EPYC 7F52.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX and EPYC 7F52 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 | 4.7 GHz | 3.5 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 5.3 GHz | 3.9 GHz |
| Multiplier | no data | 35 |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 96 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 512 KB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 64 MB (shared) | 256 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 7 nm, 14 nm |
| Die size | 2x 71 mm2 | 74 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 13,140 million | 3,800 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | no data | + |
| Unlocked multiplier | + | - |
Compatibility
Information on Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX and EPYC 7F52 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 | sTR5 | SP3 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 350 Watt | 240 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX and EPYC 7F52. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| Precision Boost 2 | + | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX and EPYC 7F52 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX and EPYC 7F52. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR5 | DDR4-3200 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 4 TiB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 8 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 204.763 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | N/A | N/A |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX and EPYC 7F52.
| PCIe version | 5.0 | 4.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 136 | no data |
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 | 28.22 | 23.47 |
| Recency | 19 October 2023 | 14 April 2020 |
| Physical cores | 12 | 16 |
| Threads | 24 | 32 |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 350 Watt | 240 Watt |
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX has a 20.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, and a 40% more advanced lithography process.
EPYC 7F52, on the other hand, has 33.3% more physical cores and 33.3% more threads, and 45.8% lower power consumption.
The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX is our recommended choice as it beats the AMD EPYC 7F52 in performance tests.
Note that Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX is a desktop processor while EPYC 7F52 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.
