EPYC 7F72 vs Ryzen 9 7940HX
Aggregate performance score
Ryzen 9 7940HX outperforms EPYC 7F72 by a minimal 2% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Ryzen 9 7940HX and EPYC 7F72 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 113 | 118 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 10.19 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Server |
| Series | AMD Dragon Range (Zen 4, Ryzen 7045) | AMD EPYC |
| Power efficiency | 57.89 | 13.06 |
| Architecture codename | Dragon Range-HX (Zen 4) (2023−2024) | Zen 2 (2017−2020) |
| Release date | 17 January 2024 (less than a year ago) | 14 April 2020 (4 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $2,450 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Ryzen 9 7940HX and EPYC 7F72 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 cores | 16 (Hexadeca-Core) | 24 (Tetracosa-Core) |
| Threads | 32 | 48 |
| Base clock speed | 2.4 GHz | 3.2 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 5.2 GHz | 3.7 GHz |
| Multiplier | no data | 32 |
| L1 cache | 1 MB | 1.5 MB |
| L2 cache | 16 MB | 12 MB |
| L3 cache | 64 MB | 192 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 7 nm, 14 nm |
| Die size | no data | 74 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 9900 Million | 3,800 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | no data | + |
| Unlocked multiplier | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Ryzen 9 7940HX and EPYC 7F72 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 configuration | no data | 2 |
| Socket | FL1 | SP3 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 55 Watt | 240 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 9 7940HX and EPYC 7F72. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512, BMI2, ABM, FMA, ADX, SMEP, SMAP, SMT, CPB, AES-NI, RDRAND, RDSEED, SHA, SME | no data |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| FMA | + | - |
| AVX | + | + |
| Precision Boost 2 | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 9 7940HX and EPYC 7F72 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 9 7940HX and EPYC 7F72. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR5 | DDR4-3200 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 4 TiB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 8 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 204.763 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | AMD Radeon 610M | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 9 7940HX and EPYC 7F72.
| PCIe version | no data | 4.0 |
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 34.92 | 34.37 |
| Recency | 17 January 2024 | 14 April 2020 |
| Physical cores | 16 | 24 |
| Threads | 32 | 48 |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 55 Watt | 240 Watt |
Ryzen 9 7940HX has a 1.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 40% more advanced lithography process, and 336.4% lower power consumption.
EPYC 7F72, on the other hand, has 50% more physical cores and 50% more threads.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Ryzen 9 7940HX and EPYC 7F72.
Be aware that Ryzen 9 7940HX is a notebook processor while EPYC 7F72 is a server/workstation one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 9 7940HX and EPYC 7F72, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
