EPYC 7F32 vs EPYC 7H12

VS

Aggregate performance score

EPYC 7H12
2019
64 cores / 128 threads, 280 Watt
43.84
+201%
EPYC 7F32
2020
8 cores / 16 threads, 180 Watt
14.57

EPYC 7H12 outperforms EPYC 7F32 by a whopping 201% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing EPYC 7H12 and EPYC 7F32 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking48494
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data3.68
Market segmentServerServer
SeriesAMD EPYCAMD EPYC
Power efficiency14.827.66
Architecture codenameZen 2 (2017−2020)Zen 2 (2017−2020)
Release date18 September 2019 (5 years ago)14 April 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$2,100

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

EPYC 7H12 and EPYC 7F32 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)8 (Octa-Core)
Threads12816
Base clock speed2.6 GHz3.7 GHz
Boost clock speed3.3 GHz3.9 GHz
Multiplier2637
L1 cache4 MB512 KB
L2 cache32 MB4 MB
L3 cache256 MB (shared)128 MB (shared)
Chip lithography7 nm, 14 nm7 nm, 14 nm
Die size192 mm274 mm2
Number of transistors4,800 million3,800 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility++
Unlocked multiplier++

Compatibility

Information on EPYC 7H12 and EPYC 7F32 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 configuration2 (Multiprocessor)1
SocketTR4SP3
Power consumption (TDP)280 Watt180 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 7H12 and EPYC 7F32. 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 7H12 and EPYC 7F32 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by EPYC 7H12 and EPYC 7F32. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4 Eight-channelDDR4-3200
Maximum memory size4 TiB4 TiB
Max memory channels88
Maximum memory bandwidth204.763 GB/s204.763 GB/s
ECC memory support++

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by EPYC 7H12 and EPYC 7F32.

PCIe versionno data4.0

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 7H12 43.84
+201%
EPYC 7F32 14.57

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 7H12 69633
+201%
EPYC 7F32 23142

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 43.84 14.57
Recency 18 September 2019 14 April 2020
Physical cores 64 8
Threads 128 16
Power consumption (TDP) 280 Watt 180 Watt

EPYC 7H12 has a 200.9% higher aggregate performance score, and 700% more physical cores and 700% more threads.

EPYC 7F32, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 6 months, and 55.6% lower power consumption.

The EPYC 7H12 is our recommended choice as it beats the EPYC 7F32 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between EPYC 7H12 and EPYC 7F32, 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 7H12
EPYC 7H12
AMD EPYC 7F32
EPYC 7F32

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.


3.7 452 votes

Rate EPYC 7H12 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 3 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about EPYC 7H12 or EPYC 7F32, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.