Ryzen 5 8400F vs EPYC 7702

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

EPYC 7702
2019
64 cores / 128 threads, 200 Watt
44.14
+192%
Ryzen 5 8400F
2024
6 cores / 12 threads, 65 Watt
15.10

EPYC 7702 outperforms Ryzen 5 8400F by a whopping 192% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing EPYC 7702 and Ryzen 5 8400F processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking45461
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.8759.85
Market segmentServerDesktop processor
SeriesAMD EPYCno data
Power efficiency20.8921.98
Architecture codenameZen 2 (2017−2020)Phoenix (2023−2024)
Release date7 August 2019 (5 years ago)1 April 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$6,450$170

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Ryzen 5 8400F has 1447% better value for money than EPYC 7702.

Detailed specifications

EPYC 7702 and Ryzen 5 8400F 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 cores64 (Tetrahexaconta-Core)6 (Hexa-Core)
Threads12812
Base clock speed2 GHz4.2 GHz
Boost clock speed3.35 GHz4.7 GHz
Multiplier20no data
L1 cache96K (per core)64 KB (per core)
L2 cache512K (per core)1 MB (per core)
L3 cache256 MB (shared)16 MB (shared)
Chip lithography7 nm, 14 nm4 nm
Die size192 mm2178 mm2
Number of transistors4,800 million25,000 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility+no data
Unlocked multiplier++

Compatibility

Information on EPYC 7702 and Ryzen 5 8400F 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
SocketTR4AM5
Power consumption (TDP)200 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 7702 and Ryzen 5 8400F. 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 7702 and Ryzen 5 8400F are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by EPYC 7702 and Ryzen 5 8400F. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4 Eight-channelDDR5
Maximum memory size4 TiBno data
Max memory channels8no data
Maximum memory bandwidth204.763 GB/sno data
ECC memory support+-

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataN/A

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by EPYC 7702 and Ryzen 5 8400F.

PCIe versionno data4.0
PCI Express lanesno data20

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 7702 44.14
+192%
Ryzen 5 8400F 15.10

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 7702 70107
+192%
Ryzen 5 8400F 23989

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 44.14 15.10
Recency 7 August 2019 1 April 2024
Physical cores 64 6
Threads 128 12
Chip lithography 7 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 200 Watt 65 Watt

EPYC 7702 has a 192.3% higher aggregate performance score, and 966.7% more physical cores and 966.7% more threads.

Ryzen 5 8400F, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 years, a 75% more advanced lithography process, and 207.7% lower power consumption.

The EPYC 7702 is our recommended choice as it beats the Ryzen 5 8400F in performance tests.

Be aware that EPYC 7702 is a server/workstation processor while Ryzen 5 8400F is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between EPYC 7702 and Ryzen 5 8400F, 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 7702
EPYC 7702
AMD Ryzen 5 8400F
Ryzen 5 8400F

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.


4.7 29 votes

Rate EPYC 7702 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 228 votes

Rate Ryzen 5 8400F on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about EPYC 7702 or Ryzen 5 8400F, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.