Ryzen 9 3900X vs EPYC 7501

VS

Aggregate performance score

EPYC 7501
2017
32 cores / 64 threads, 155 Watt
16.29
Ryzen 9 3900X
2019
12 cores / 24 threads, 105 Watt
21.31
+30.8%

Ryzen 9 3900X outperforms EPYC 7501 by a substantial 31% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing EPYC 7501 and Ryzen 9 3900X processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking428269
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.1820.81
Market segmentServerDesktop processor
SeriesAMD EPYCAMD Ryzen 9
Power efficiency8.7418.51
Architecture codenameNaples (2017−2018)Matisse (Zen 2) (2019−2020)
Release date20 June 2017 (7 years ago)7 July 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$3,400$499

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Ryzen 9 3900X has 1664% better value for money than EPYC 7501.

Detailed specifications

EPYC 7501 and Ryzen 9 3900X 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 cores32 (Dotriaconta-Core)12 (Dodeca-Core)
Threads6424
Base clock speed2 GHz3.8 GHz
Boost clock speed2 GHz4.6 GHz
Multiplier20no data
L1 cache3 MB768 KB
L2 cache16 MB6 MB
L3 cache64 MB (shared)64 MB
Chip lithography14 nm7 nm, 12 nm
Die size213 mm2no data
Maximum core temperatureno data95 °C
Number of transistors19200 Million19,200 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplier++

Compatibility

Information on EPYC 7501 and Ryzen 9 3900X 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 configuration2 (Multiprocessor)1 (Uniprocessor)
SocketTR4AM4
Power consumption (TDP)155 W, 170 Watt105 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 7501 and Ryzen 9 3900X. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI++
AVX++
Precision Boost 2no data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by EPYC 7501 and Ryzen 9 3900X are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by EPYC 7501 and Ryzen 9 3900X. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4 Eight-channelDDR4 Dual-channel
Maximum memory size2 TiB128 GB
Max memory channels82
Maximum memory bandwidth170.671 GB/s51.196 GB/s
ECC memory support+-

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by EPYC 7501 and Ryzen 9 3900X.

PCIe version3.0no data
PCI Express lanes128no data

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 7501 16.29
Ryzen 9 3900X 21.31
+30.8%

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 7501 24925
Ryzen 9 3900X 32619
+30.9%

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

EPYC 7501 726
Ryzen 9 3900X 1710
+136%

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

EPYC 7501 6529
Ryzen 9 3900X 9950
+52.4%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 16.29 21.31
Recency 20 June 2017 7 July 2019
Physical cores 32 12
Threads 64 24
Chip lithography 14 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 155 Watt 105 Watt

EPYC 7501 has 166.7% more physical cores and 166.7% more threads.

Ryzen 9 3900X, on the other hand, has a 30.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 47.6% lower power consumption.

The Ryzen 9 3900X is our recommended choice as it beats the EPYC 7501 in performance tests.

Be aware that EPYC 7501 is a server/workstation processor while Ryzen 9 3900X is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between EPYC 7501 and Ryzen 9 3900X, 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 7501
EPYC 7501
AMD Ryzen 9 3900X
Ryzen 9 3900X

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.


5 1 vote

Rate EPYC 7501 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.7 5125 votes

Rate Ryzen 9 3900X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about EPYC 7501 or Ryzen 9 3900X, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.