EPYC 9275F vs Ryzen 9 PRO 7945

Primary details

Comparing Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 and EPYC 9275F processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking140not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentServerServer
Power efficiency43.84no data
Architecture codenameRaphael (2023−2024)Turin (2024)
Release date13 June 2023 (1 year ago)10 October 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$3,439

Detailed specifications

Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 and EPYC 9275F 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 cores12 (Dodeca-Core)24 (Tetracosa-Core)
Threads2448
Base clock speed3.7 GHz4.1 GHz
Boost clock speed5.4 GHz4.8 GHz
L1 cache64 KB (per core)80 KB (per core)
L2 cache1 MB (per core)1 MB (per core)
L3 cache64 MB (shared)256 MB (shared)
Chip lithography5 nm4 nm
Die size2x 71 mm28x 70.6 mm2
Maximum case temperature (TCase)47 °Cno data
Number of transistors13,140 million66,520 million
64 bit support++

Compatibility

Information on Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 and EPYC 9275F 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
SocketAM5SP5
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt320 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 and EPYC 9275F. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI++
AVX++
Precision Boost 2++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 and EPYC 9275F are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 and EPYC 9275F. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR5DDR5

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon GraphicsN/A

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 and EPYC 9275F.

PCIe version5.05.0
PCI Express lanes24128

Pros & cons summary


Recency 13 June 2023 10 October 2024
Physical cores 12 24
Threads 24 48
Chip lithography 5 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 320 Watt

Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 has 392.3% lower power consumption.

EPYC 9275F, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and a 25% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 and EPYC 9275F. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 and EPYC 9275F, 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 9 PRO 7945
Ryzen 9 PRO 7945
AMD EPYC 9275F
EPYC 9275F

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.


4.6 22 votes

Rate Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate EPYC 9275F on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 or EPYC 9275F, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.