EPYC 7H12 vs FX-4100

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

FX-4100
2011
4 cores / 4 threads, 95 Watt
1.69
EPYC 7H12
2019
64 cores / 128 threads, 280 Watt
45.02
+2564%

EPYC 7H12 outperforms FX-4100 by a whopping 2564% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing FX-4100 and EPYC 7H12 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking202941
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorServer
Seriesno dataAMD EPYC
Architecture codenameZambezi (2011−2012)Zen 2 (2017−2020)
Release date12 October 2011 (12 years ago)18 September 2019 (4 years ago)

Detailed specifications

FX-4100 and EPYC 7H12 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)64 (Tetrahexaconta-Core)
Threads4128
Base clock speed3.6 GHz2.6 GHz
Boost clock speed3.8 GHz3.3 GHz
Multiplierno data26
L1 cache192 KB4 MB
L2 cache4096 KB32 MB
L3 cache8192 KB256 MB (shared)
Chip lithography32 nm7 nm, 14 nm
Die size315 mm2192 mm2
Maximum core temperature71 °Cno data
Number of transistors1,200 million4,800 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplier++
P0 Vcore voltageMin: 1.1 V - Max: 1.4125 Vno data

Compatibility

Information on FX-4100 and EPYC 7H12 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 (Multiprocessor)
SocketAM3+TR4
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt280 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-4100 and EPYC 7H12. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI++
FMA+-
AVX++
Precision Boost 2no data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by FX-4100 and EPYC 7H12 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-4100 and EPYC 7H12. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR4 Eight-channel
Maximum memory sizeno data4 TiB
Max memory channelsno data8
Maximum memory bandwidthno data204.763 GB/s
ECC memory support-+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FX-4100 and EPYC 7H12.

PCIe versionn/ano data

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.

FX-4100 1.69
EPYC 7H12 45.02
+2564%

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.

FX-4100 2610
EPYC 7H12 69633
+2568%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.69 45.02
Recency 12 October 2011 18 September 2019
Physical cores 4 64
Threads 4 128
Chip lithography 32 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 280 Watt

FX-4100 has 194.7% lower power consumption.

EPYC 7H12, on the other hand, has a 2563.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, 1500% more physical cores and 3100% more threads, and a 357.1% more advanced lithography process.

The EPYC 7H12 is our recommended choice as it beats the FX-4100 in performance tests.

Note that FX-4100 is a desktop processor while EPYC 7H12 is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between FX-4100 and EPYC 7H12, 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 FX-4100
FX-4100
AMD EPYC 7H12
EPYC 7H12

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.


3.9 846 votes

Rate FX-4100 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 450 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about FX-4100 or EPYC 7H12, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.