Ryzen AI 9 HX 170 vs EPYC 7F52
Primary details
Comparing EPYC 7F52 and Ryzen AI 9 HX 170 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 192 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 5.70 | no data |
| Market segment | Server | Laptop |
| Series | AMD EPYC | AMD Strix Point (Zen 5/5c, Ryzen AI 3/5/7/9) |
| Power efficiency | 15.88 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Zen 2 (2017−2020) | Strix Point-HX (Zen 5) (2024) |
| Release date | 14 April 2020 (4 years ago) | 4 June 2024 (less than a year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $3,100 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
EPYC 7F52 and Ryzen AI 9 HX 170 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 cores | 16 (Hexadeca-Core) | 12 (Dodeca-Core) |
| Threads | 32 | 24 |
| Base clock speed | 3.5 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 3.9 GHz | 5.1 GHz |
| Multiplier | 35 | no data |
| L1 cache | 1 MB | no data |
| L2 cache | 8 MB | no data |
| L3 cache | 256 MB (shared) | 36 MB |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm, 14 nm | 3 nm |
| Die size | 74 mm2 | no data |
| Number of transistors | 3,800 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | + | no data |
| Unlocked multiplier | + | - |
Compatibility
Information on EPYC 7F52 and Ryzen AI 9 HX 170 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 configuration | 2 | no data |
| Socket | SP3 | no data |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 240 Watt | 55 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 7F52 and Ryzen AI 9 HX 170. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | XDNA 2 NPU |
| AES-NI | + | - |
| AVX | + | - |
| Precision Boost 2 | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by EPYC 7F52 and Ryzen AI 9 HX 170 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by EPYC 7F52 and Ryzen AI 9 HX 170. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4-3200 | no data |
| Maximum memory size | 4 TiB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 8 | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 204.763 GB/s | no data |
| ECC memory support | + | - |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by EPYC 7F52 and Ryzen AI 9 HX 170.
| PCIe version | 4.0 | no data |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 14 April 2020 | 4 June 2024 |
| Physical cores | 16 | 12 |
| Threads | 32 | 24 |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm | 3 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 240 Watt | 55 Watt |
EPYC 7F52 has 33.3% more physical cores and 33.3% more threads.
Ryzen AI 9 HX 170, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 years, a 133.3% more advanced lithography process, and 336.4% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between EPYC 7F52 and Ryzen AI 9 HX 170. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that EPYC 7F52 is a server/workstation processor while Ryzen AI 9 HX 170 is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between EPYC 7F52 and Ryzen AI 9 HX 170, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
