EPYC 4364P vs i3-10105F

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Core i3-10105F
2021
4 cores / 8 threads, 65 Watt
5.66
EPYC 4364P
2024
8 cores / 16 threads, 105 Watt
22.74
+302%

EPYC 4364P outperforms Core i3-10105F by a whopping 302% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core i3-10105F and EPYC 4364P processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking1135228
Place by popularity56not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data43.93
Market segmentDesktop processorServer
Power efficiency8.2420.50
Architecture codenameComet Lake-R (2021)Raphael (2023−2024)
Release date16 March 2021 (3 years ago)21 May 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$97$399

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Core i3-10105F and EPYC 4364P 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)8 (Octa-Core)
Threads816
Base clock speed3.7 GHz4.5 GHz
Boost clock speed4.4 GHz5.4 GHz
Bus rate8 GT/sno data
L1 cache64 KB (per core)64 KB (per core)
L2 cache256 KB (per core)1 MB (per core)
L3 cache6 MB (shared)32 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm5 nm
Die sizeno data71 mm2
Maximum core temperature100 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)72 °C61 °C
Number of transistorsno data6,570 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility+no data

Compatibility

Information on Core i3-10105F and EPYC 4364P 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 configuration11
SocketFCLGA1200AM5
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt105 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i3-10105F and EPYC 4364P. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2no data
AES-NI++
AVX++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Turbo Boost Technology2.0no data
Hyper-Threading Technology+no data
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Turbo Boost Max 3.0-no data
Precision Boost 2no data+

Security technologies

Core i3-10105F and EPYC 4364P technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+no data
EDB+no data
Secure Key+no data
Identity Protection+-
SGXYes with Intel® MEno data
OS Guard+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i3-10105F and EPYC 4364P are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
VT-d+no data
VT-x+no data
EPT+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i3-10105F and EPYC 4364P. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-2666DDR5
Maximum memory size128 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidth41.6 GB/sno data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardN/AAMD Radeon Graphics

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i3-10105F and EPYC 4364P.

PCIe version3.05.0
PCI Express lanes1628

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.

i3-10105F 5.66
EPYC 4364P 22.74
+302%

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.

i3-10105F 8989
EPYC 4364P 36124
+302%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 5.66 22.74
Recency 16 March 2021 21 May 2024
Physical cores 4 8
Threads 8 16
Chip lithography 14 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 105 Watt

i3-10105F has 61.5% lower power consumption.

EPYC 4364P, on the other hand, has a 301.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and a 180% more advanced lithography process.

The EPYC 4364P is our recommended choice as it beats the Core i3-10105F in performance tests.

Note that Core i3-10105F is a desktop processor while EPYC 4364P is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core i3-10105F and EPYC 4364P, 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.


Intel Core i3-10105F
Core i3-10105F
AMD EPYC 4364P
EPYC 4364P

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.


4.2 3599 votes

Rate Core i3-10105F on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate EPYC 4364P on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core i3-10105F or EPYC 4364P, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.