EPYC 75F3 vs Ryzen 5 4600HS

VS

Aggregate performance score

Ryzen 5 4600HS
2020
6 cores / 12 threads, 35 Watt
9.16
EPYC 75F3
2021
32 cores / 64 threads, 280 Watt
43.95
+380%

EPYC 75F3 outperforms Ryzen 5 4600HS by a whopping 380% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Ryzen 5 4600HS and EPYC 75F3 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking84651
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data5.93
Market segmentLaptopServer
SeriesAMD Renoir (Ryzen 4000 APU)AMD EPYC
Power efficiency24.3114.58
Architecture codenameRenoir-HS (Zen 2) (2020)Milan (2021−2023)
Release date16 March 2020 (4 years ago)12 January 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$4,860

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Ryzen 5 4600HS and EPYC 75F3 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 cores6 (Hexa-Core)32 (Dotriaconta-Core)
Threads1264
Base clock speed3 GHz2.95 GHz
Boost clock speed4 GHz4 GHz
Multiplier3029.5
L1 cache384 KB2 MB
L2 cache3 MB16 MB
L3 cache8 MB256 MB (shared)
Chip lithography7 nm7 nm+
Die size156 mm28x 81 mm2
Maximum core temperature105 °Cno data
Number of transistors9800 Million33,200 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility++

Compatibility

Information on Ryzen 5 4600HS and EPYC 75F3 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
SocketFP6SP3
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt280 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 5 4600HS and EPYC 75F3. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsXFR, FMA3, SSE 4.2, AVX2, SMTno data
AES-NI++
AVX++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 5 4600HS and EPYC 75F3 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 5 4600HS and EPYC 75F3. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-4266DDR4-3200
Maximum memory size64 GB4 TiB
Max memory channels4no data
Maximum memory bandwidth68.27 GB/s204.795 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000)N/A

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 5 4600HS and EPYC 75F3.

PCIe version3.04.0
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.

Ryzen 5 4600HS 9.16
EPYC 75F3 43.95
+380%

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.

Ryzen 5 4600HS 14285
EPYC 75F3 68505
+380%

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.

Ryzen 5 4600HS 1293
EPYC 75F3 1826
+41.2%

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.

Ryzen 5 4600HS 5081
EPYC 75F3 16432
+223%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 9.16 43.95
Recency 16 March 2020 12 January 2021
Physical cores 6 32
Threads 12 64
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 280 Watt

Ryzen 5 4600HS has 700% lower power consumption.

EPYC 75F3, on the other hand, has a 379.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 months, and 433.3% more physical cores and 433.3% more threads.

The EPYC 75F3 is our recommended choice as it beats the Ryzen 5 4600HS in performance tests.

Be aware that Ryzen 5 4600HS is a notebook processor while EPYC 75F3 is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 5 4600HS and EPYC 75F3, 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 Ryzen 5 4600HS
Ryzen 5 4600HS
AMD EPYC 75F3
EPYC 75F3

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.


4.3 46 votes

Rate Ryzen 5 4600HS on a scale of 1 to 5:

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

Rate EPYC 75F3 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Ryzen 5 4600HS or EPYC 75F3, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.