EPYC 7702 vs FX-8100

VS

Aggregate performance score

FX-8100
2011
8 cores / 8 threads, 95 Watt
2.55
EPYC 7702
2019
64 cores / 128 threads, 200 Watt
44.14
+1631%

EPYC 7702 outperforms FX-8100 by a whopping 1631% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing FX-8100 and EPYC 7702 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking173645
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data3.87
Market segmentDesktop processorServer
Seriesno dataAMD EPYC
Power efficiency2.5420.89
Architecture codenameZambezi (2011−2012)Zen 2 (2017−2020)
Release date12 October 2011 (13 years ago)7 August 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$6,450

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

FX-8100 and EPYC 7702 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 cores8 (Octa-Core)64 (Tetrahexaconta-Core)
Threads8128
Base clock speed2.8 GHz2 GHz
Boost clock speed3.7 GHz3.35 GHz
Multiplierno data20
L1 cache384 KB96K (per core)
L2 cache8 MB512K (per core)
L3 cache8 MB (shared)256 MB (shared)
Chip lithography32 nm7 nm, 14 nm
Die size315 mm2192 mm2
Number of transistors1,200 million4,800 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplier++

Compatibility

Information on FX-8100 and EPYC 7702 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 Watt200 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-8100 and EPYC 7702. 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-8100 and EPYC 7702 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-8100 and EPYC 7702. 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-8100 and EPYC 7702.

PCIe version2.0no 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-8100 2.55
EPYC 7702 44.14
+1631%

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-8100 4055
EPYC 7702 70107
+1629%

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.

FX-8100 411
EPYC 7702 1178
+187%

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.

FX-8100 1819
EPYC 7702 11708
+544%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.55 44.14
Recency 12 October 2011 7 August 2019
Physical cores 8 64
Threads 8 128
Chip lithography 32 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 200 Watt

FX-8100 has 110.5% lower power consumption.

EPYC 7702, on the other hand, has a 1631% 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 7702 is our recommended choice as it beats the FX-8100 in performance tests.

Note that FX-8100 is a desktop processor while EPYC 7702 is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between FX-8100 and EPYC 7702, 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-8100
FX-8100
AMD EPYC 7702
EPYC 7702

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 64 votes

Rate FX-8100 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.7 29 votes

Rate EPYC 7702 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about FX-8100 or EPYC 7702, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.