EPYC 9174F vs EPYC 7F32

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

EPYC 7F32
2020
8 cores / 16 threads, 180 Watt
14.57
EPYC 9174F
2022
16 cores / 32 threads, 320 Watt
34.93
+140%

EPYC 9174F outperforms EPYC 7F32 by a whopping 140% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing EPYC 7F32 and EPYC 9174F processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking494106
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.687.10
Market segmentServerServer
SeriesAMD EPYCAMD EPYC
Power efficiency7.6610.33
Architecture codenameZen 2 (2017−2020)Genoa (2022−2023)
Release date14 April 2020 (4 years ago)10 November 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$2,100$3,850

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

EPYC 9174F has 93% better value for money than EPYC 7F32.

Detailed specifications

EPYC 7F32 and EPYC 9174F 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)16 (Hexadeca-Core)
Threads1632
Base clock speed3.7 GHz4.1 GHz
Boost clock speed3.9 GHz4.1 GHz
Multiplier3741
L1 cache512 KB1 MB
L2 cache4 MB16 MB
L3 cache128 MB (shared)256 MB (shared)
Chip lithography7 nm, 14 nm5 nm, 6 nm
Die size74 mm28x 72 mm2
Number of transistors3,800 million52,560 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility+no data
Unlocked multiplier+-

Compatibility

Information on EPYC 7F32 and EPYC 9174F 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 configuration12
SocketSP3SP5
Power consumption (TDP)180 Watt320 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 7F32 and EPYC 9174F. 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 7F32 and EPYC 9174F are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by EPYC 7F32 and EPYC 9174F. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-3200DDR5-4800
Maximum memory size4 TiB6 TiB
Max memory channels8no data
Maximum memory bandwidth204.763 GB/s460.8 GB/s
ECC memory support+-

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by EPYC 7F32 and EPYC 9174F.

PCIe version4.05.0
PCI Express lanesno data128

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
EPYC 9174F 34.93
+140%

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
EPYC 9174F 55485
+140%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 14.57 34.93
Recency 14 April 2020 10 November 2022
Physical cores 8 16
Threads 16 32
Chip lithography 7 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 180 Watt 320 Watt

EPYC 7F32 has 77.8% lower power consumption.

EPYC 9174F, on the other hand, has a 139.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and a 40% more advanced lithography process.

The EPYC 9174F is our recommended choice as it beats the EPYC 7F32 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between EPYC 7F32 and EPYC 9174F, 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
AMD EPYC 9174F
EPYC 9174F

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
4.7 3 votes

Rate EPYC 9174F on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about EPYC 7F32 or EPYC 9174F, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.