Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 vs EPYC 7763

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

EPYC 7763
2021
64 cores / 128 threads, 280 Watt
53.23
+76.8%
Ryzen 9 PRO 7945
2023
12 cores / 24 threads, 65 Watt
30.11

EPYC 7763 outperforms Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 by an impressive 77% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing EPYC 7763 and Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking25141
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.32no data
Market segmentServerServer
SeriesAMD EPYCno data
Power efficiency17.9943.84
Architecture codenameMilan (2021−2023)Raphael (2023−2024)
Release date15 March 2021 (3 years ago)13 June 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$7,890no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

EPYC 7763 and Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 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)12 (Dodeca-Core)
Threads12824
Base clock speed2.45 GHz3.7 GHz
Boost clock speed3.5 GHz5.4 GHz
Multiplier24.5no data
L1 cache64 KB (per core)64 KB (per core)
L2 cache512 KB (per core)1 MB (per core)
L3 cache256 MB (shared)64 MB (shared)
Chip lithography7 nm+5 nm
Die size8x 81 mm22x 71 mm2
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data47 °C
Number of transistors33,200 million13,140 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility+no data

Compatibility

Information on EPYC 7763 and Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 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 configuration21
SocketSP3AM5
Power consumption (TDP)280 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 7763 and Ryzen 9 PRO 7945. 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 7763 and Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by EPYC 7763 and Ryzen 9 PRO 7945. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-3200DDR5
Maximum memory size4 TiBno data
Maximum memory bandwidth204.795 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 EPYC 7763 and Ryzen 9 PRO 7945.

PCIe version4.05.0
PCI Express lanes12824

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 7763 53.23
+76.8%
Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 30.11

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 7763 84557
+76.8%
Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 47830

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 7763 1344
Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 2905
+116%

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 7763 10361
Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 16049
+54.9%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 53.23 30.11
Recency 15 March 2021 13 June 2023
Physical cores 64 12
Threads 128 24
Chip lithography 7 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 280 Watt 65 Watt

EPYC 7763 has a 76.8% higher aggregate performance score, and 433.3% more physical cores and 433.3% more threads.

Ryzen 9 PRO 7945, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, a 40% more advanced lithography process, and 330.8% lower power consumption.

The EPYC 7763 is our recommended choice as it beats the Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between EPYC 7763 and Ryzen 9 PRO 7945, 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 7763
EPYC 7763
AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 7945
Ryzen 9 PRO 7945

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.


3.2 1197 votes

Rate EPYC 7763 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.6 23 votes

Rate Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about EPYC 7763 or Ryzen 9 PRO 7945, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.