Ryzen 9 7900X3D vs EPYC 7373X
Primary details
Comparing EPYC 7373X and Ryzen 9 7900X3D processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | 130 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 49.24 |
| Market segment | Server | Desktop processor |
| Series | no data | AMD Ryzen 9 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 25.01 |
| Architecture codename | Milan-X (2022) | Raphael (2023−2024) |
| Release date | 22 March 2022 (2 years ago) | 4 January 2023 (1 year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $599 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
EPYC 7373X and Ryzen 9 7900X3D 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 | 16 (Hexadeca-Core) | 12 (Dodeca-Core) |
| Threads | 32 | 24 |
| Base clock speed | 3.05 GHz | 4.4 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.8 GHz | 5.6 GHz |
| L1 cache | 64K (per core) | 64K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 512K (per core) | 1 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 768 MB (shared) | 128 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm | 5 nm, 6 nm |
| Die size | 8x 81 mm2 | 2x 71 mm2 |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 47 °C |
| Number of transistors | 33,200 million | 13,140 million |
| 64 bit support | - | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | no data | + |
| Unlocked multiplier | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on EPYC 7373X and Ryzen 9 7900X3D 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 | 2 | 1 |
| Socket | SP3 | AM5 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 240 Watt | 120 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 7373X and Ryzen 9 7900X3D. 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 EPYC 7373X and Ryzen 9 7900X3D are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by EPYC 7373X and Ryzen 9 7900X3D. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4-3200 | DDR5-5200 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 128 GB |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | AMD Radeon Graphics |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by EPYC 7373X and Ryzen 9 7900X3D.
| PCIe version | 4.0 | 5.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 128 | 24 |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 22 March 2022 | 4 January 2023 |
| Physical cores | 16 | 12 |
| Threads | 32 | 24 |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 240 Watt | 120 Watt |
EPYC 7373X has 33.3% more physical cores and 33.3% more threads.
Ryzen 9 7900X3D, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 9 months, a 40% more advanced lithography process, and 100% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between EPYC 7373X and Ryzen 9 7900X3D. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that EPYC 7373X is a server/workstation processor while Ryzen 9 7900X3D is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between EPYC 7373X and Ryzen 9 7900X3D, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
