Ultra 7 268V vs EPYC 7302P

VS

Aggregate performance score

EPYC 7302P
2019
16 cores / 32 threads, 155 Watt
20.57
+135%
Core Ultra 7 268V
2024
8 cores / 8 threads, 17 Watt
8.76

EPYC 7302P outperforms Core Ultra 7 268V by a whopping 135% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing EPYC 7302P and Core Ultra 7 268V processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking273873
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation13.40no data
Market segmentServerLaptop
SeriesAMD EPYCno data
Power efficiency12.5648.77
Architecture codenameZen 2 (2017−2020)Lunar Lake (2024)
Release date7 August 2019 (5 years ago)24 September 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$825no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

EPYC 7302P and Core Ultra 7 268V 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)
Threads328
Base clock speed3 GHz2.2 GHz
Boost clock speed3.3 GHz5 GHz
Bus rateno data37 MHz
Multiplier30no data
L1 cache1 MB192 KB (per core)
L2 cache8 MB2.5 MB (per core)
L3 cache128 MB (shared)12 MB (shared)
Chip lithography7 nm, 14 nm3 nm
Die size192 mm2no data
Maximum core temperatureno data100 °C
Number of transistors4,800 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility+no data
Unlocked multiplier+-

Compatibility

Information on EPYC 7302P and Core Ultra 7 268V 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
SocketTR4Intel BGA 2833
Power consumption (TDP)155 Watt17 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 7302P and Core Ultra 7 268V. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI++
AVX++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
TSX-+
Precision Boost 2+no data

Security technologies

EPYC 7302P and Core Ultra 7 268V technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by EPYC 7302P and Core Ultra 7 268V are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by EPYC 7302P and Core Ultra 7 268V. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4 Eight-channelDDR5
Maximum memory size4 TiBno data
Maximum memory bandwidth204.763 GB/sno data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataArc 140V

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by EPYC 7302P and Core Ultra 7 268V.

PCIe versionno data5.0
PCI Express lanesno data4

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.

EPYC 7302P 20.57
+135%
Ultra 7 268V 8.76

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.

EPYC 7302P 32669
+135%
Ultra 7 268V 13916

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 20.57 8.76
Recency 7 August 2019 24 September 2024
Physical cores 16 8
Threads 32 8
Chip lithography 7 nm 3 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 155 Watt 17 Watt

EPYC 7302P has a 134.8% higher aggregate performance score, and 100% more physical cores and 300% more threads.

Ultra 7 268V, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 5 years, a 133.3% more advanced lithography process, and 811.8% lower power consumption.

The EPYC 7302P is our recommended choice as it beats the Core Ultra 7 268V in performance tests.

Be aware that EPYC 7302P is a server/workstation processor while Core Ultra 7 268V is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between EPYC 7302P and Core Ultra 7 268V, 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 EPYC 7302P
EPYC 7302P
Intel Core Ultra 7 268V
Core Ultra 7 268V

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.


3.7 27 votes

Rate EPYC 7302P on a scale of 1 to 5:

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

Rate Core Ultra 7 268V on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about EPYC 7302P or Core Ultra 7 268V, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.