EPYC 9965 vs 7 160UL
Aggregate performance score
EPYC 9965 outperforms Core 7 160UL by a whopping 1356% 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 | 1165 | 2 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Server |
| Power efficiency | 17.71 | 7.73 |
| Designer | Intel | AMD |
| Manufacturer | Intel | TSMC |
| Architecture codename | Raptor Lake-PS (2024) | Turin (2024) |
| Release date | 8 April 2024 (1 year ago) | 10 October 2024 (less than a year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $14,813 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
Core 7 160UL and EPYC 9965 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 | 10 (Deca-Core) | 192 |
| Threads | 12 | 384 |
| Base clock speed | 1.8 GHz | 2.25 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 5.2 GHz | 3.7 GHz |
| L1 cache | 80 KB (per core) | 80 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1.25 MB (per core) | 1 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 12 MB (shared) | 384 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 10 nm | 3 nm |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
Compatibility
Information on Core 7 160UL and EPYC 9965 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 | 1700 | SP5 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 500 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 7 160UL and EPYC 9965. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| vPro | + | no data |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| TSX | + | - |
| Precision Boost 2 | no data | + |
Security technologies
Core 7 160UL and EPYC 9965 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core 7 160UL and EPYC 9965 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
| VT-d | + | no data |
| VT-x | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core 7 160UL and EPYC 9965. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4, DDR5 | DDR5 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Intel Iris Xe Graphics 96EU | N/A |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core 7 160UL and EPYC 9965.
| PCIe version | 4.0 | 5.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 8 | 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 | 6.64 | 96.66 |
| Recency | 8 April 2024 | 10 October 2024 |
| Physical cores | 10 | 192 |
| Threads | 12 | 384 |
| Chip lithography | 10 nm | 3 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 500 Watt |
7 160UL has 3233.3% lower power consumption.
EPYC 9965, on the other hand, has a 1355.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 months, 1820% more physical cores and 3100% more threads, and a 233.3% more advanced lithography process.
The AMD EPYC 9965 is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Core 7 160UL in performance tests.
Note that Core 7 160UL is a desktop processor while EPYC 9965 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.
