EPYC 9654 vs EPYC 7F52

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

EPYC 7F52
2020
16 cores / 32 threads, 240 Watt
26.49
EPYC 9654
2022
96 cores / 192 threads, 360 Watt
76.66
+189%

EPYC 9654 outperforms EPYC 7F52 by a whopping 189% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing EPYC 7F52 and EPYC 9654 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking1895
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation5.651.30
Market segmentServerServer
SeriesAMD EPYCAMD EPYC
Power efficiency10.0619.42
Architecture codenameZen 2 (2017−2020)Genoa (2022−2023)
Release date14 April 2020 (4 years ago)10 November 2022 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$3,100$11,805

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

EPYC 7F52 has 335% better value for money than EPYC 9654.

Detailed specifications

EPYC 7F52 and EPYC 9654 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 cores16 (Hexadeca-Core)96
Threads32192
Base clock speed3.5 GHz2.4 GHz
Boost clock speed3.9 GHz3.7 GHz
Multiplier3524
L1 cache1 MB64K (per core)
L2 cache8 MB1 MB (per core)
L3 cache256 MB (shared)384 MB (shared)
Chip lithography7 nm, 14 nm5 nm, 6 nm
Die size74 mm212x 72 mm2
Number of transistors3,800 million78,840 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility+no data
Unlocked multiplier+-

Compatibility

Information on EPYC 7F52 and EPYC 9654 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 configuration22
SocketSP3SP5
Power consumption (TDP)240 Watt360 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 7F52 and EPYC 9654. 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 7F52 and EPYC 9654 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by EPYC 7F52 and EPYC 9654. 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 7F52 and EPYC 9654.

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 7F52 26.49
EPYC 9654 76.66
+189%

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 7F52 40534
EPYC 9654 117317
+189%

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 7F52 1412
EPYC 9654 1827
+29.4%

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 7F52 9811
EPYC 9654 18626
+89.8%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 26.49 76.66
Recency 14 April 2020 10 November 2022
Physical cores 16 96
Threads 32 192
Chip lithography 7 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 240 Watt 360 Watt

EPYC 7F52 has 50% lower power consumption.

EPYC 9654, on the other hand, has a 189.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, 500% more physical cores and 500% more threads, and a 40% more advanced lithography process.

The EPYC 9654 is our recommended choice as it beats the EPYC 7F52 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between EPYC 7F52 and EPYC 9654, 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 7F52
EPYC 7F52
AMD EPYC 9654
EPYC 9654

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.


4.1 9 votes

Rate EPYC 7F52 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 992 votes

Rate EPYC 9654 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about EPYC 7F52 or EPYC 9654, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.