EPYC 7513 vs FX-4350

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

FX-4350
2013
4 cores / 4 threads, 125 Watt
2.09
EPYC 7513
2021
32 cores / 64 threads, 200 Watt
37.32
+1686%

EPYC 7513 outperforms FX-4350 by a whopping 1686% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing FX-4350 and EPYC 7513 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking187684
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data10.66
Market segmentDesktop processorServer
Seriesno dataAMD EPYC
Power efficiency1.5817.66
Architecture codenameVishera (2012−2015)Milan (2021−2023)
Release date29 April 2013 (11 years ago)15 March 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$2,840

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

FX-4350 and EPYC 7513 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)32 (Dotriaconta-Core)
Threads464
Base clock speed4.2 GHz2.6 GHz
Boost clock speed4.3 GHz3.65 GHz
Multiplierno data26
L1 cacheno data64 KB (per core)
L2 cache4096 KB512 KB (per core)
L3 cacheno data128 MB (shared)
Chip lithography32 nm7 nm+
Die size315 mm28x 81 mm2
Maximum core temperature61 °Cno data
Number of transistors1,200 million33,200 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplier+-
P0 Vcore voltageMin: 1.275 V - Max: 1.4 Vno data

Compatibility

Information on FX-4350 and EPYC 7513 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
SocketAM3+SP3
Power consumption (TDP)125 Watt200 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-4350 and EPYC 7513. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI++
FMA+-
AVX++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by FX-4350 and EPYC 7513 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-4350 and EPYC 7513. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR4-3200
Maximum memory sizeno data4 TiB
Maximum memory bandwidthno data204.795 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardOn certain motherboards (Chipset feature)N/A

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FX-4350 and EPYC 7513.

PCIe versionn/a4.0
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.

FX-4350 2.09
EPYC 7513 37.32
+1686%

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-4350 3321
EPYC 7513 59285
+1685%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.09 37.32
Recency 29 April 2013 15 March 2021
Physical cores 4 32
Threads 4 64
Chip lithography 32 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 125 Watt 200 Watt

FX-4350 has 60% lower power consumption.

EPYC 7513, on the other hand, has a 1685.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, 700% more physical cores and 1500% more threads, and a 357.1% more advanced lithography process.

The EPYC 7513 is our recommended choice as it beats the FX-4350 in performance tests.

Note that FX-4350 is a desktop processor while EPYC 7513 is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between FX-4350 and EPYC 7513, 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-4350
FX-4350
AMD EPYC 7513
EPYC 7513

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.


3.8 546 votes

Rate FX-4350 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.4 7 votes

Rate EPYC 7513 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about FX-4350 or EPYC 7513, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.