Ultra 5 226V vs EPYC 7F32

VS

Aggregate performance score

EPYC 7F32
2020
8 cores / 16 threads, 180 Watt
14.57
+21.5%
Core Ultra 5 226V
2024
8 cores / 8 threads, 17 Watt
11.99

EPYC 7F32 outperforms Core Ultra 5 226V by a significant 22% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing EPYC 7F32 and Core Ultra 5 226V processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking493649
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.69no data
Market segmentServerLaptop
SeriesAMD EPYCno data
Power efficiency7.6666.75
Architecture codenameZen 2 (2017−2020)Lunar Lake (2024)
Release date14 April 2020 (4 years ago)24 September 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$2,100no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

EPYC 7F32 and Core Ultra 5 226V 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 cores8 (Octa-Core)8 (Octa-Core)
Threads168
Base clock speed3.7 GHz2.1 GHz
Boost clock speed3.9 GHz4.5 GHz
Bus rateno data37 MHz
Multiplier37no data
L1 cache96K (per core)192 KB (per core)
L2 cache512K (per core)2.5 MB (per core)
L3 cache128 MB (shared)8 MB (shared)
Chip lithography7 nm, 14 nm3 nm
Die size74 mm2no data
Maximum core temperatureno data100 °C
Number of transistors3,800 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility+no data
Unlocked multiplier+-

Compatibility

Information on EPYC 7F32 and Core Ultra 5 226V 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 configuration11
SocketSP3Intel BGA 2833
Power consumption (TDP)180 Watt17 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 7F32 and Core Ultra 5 226V. 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 7F32 and Core Ultra 5 226V technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by EPYC 7F32 and Core Ultra 5 226V are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by EPYC 7F32 and Core Ultra 5 226V. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-3200DDR5
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 dataArc 130V

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by EPYC 7F32 and Core Ultra 5 226V.

PCIe version4.05.0
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 7F32 14.57
+21.5%
Ultra 5 226V 11.99

  • Passmark

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 7F32 23142
+21.6%
Ultra 5 226V 19038

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 14.57 11.99
Recency 14 April 2020 24 September 2024
Threads 16 8
Chip lithography 7 nm 3 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 180 Watt 17 Watt

EPYC 7F32 has a 21.5% higher aggregate performance score, and 100% more threads.

Ultra 5 226V, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 years, a 133.3% more advanced lithography process, and 958.8% lower power consumption.

The EPYC 7F32 is our recommended choice as it beats the Core Ultra 5 226V in performance tests.

Be aware that EPYC 7F32 is a server/workstation processor while Core Ultra 5 226V is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between EPYC 7F32 and Core Ultra 5 226V, 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 7F32
EPYC 7F32
Intel Core Ultra 5 226V
Core Ultra 5 226V

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
3 votes

Rate EPYC 7F32 on a scale of 1 to 5:

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

Rate Core Ultra 5 226V on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about EPYC 7F32 or Core Ultra 5 226V, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.