EPYC 7F52 vs Ryzen Threadripper 1950

VS

Aggregate performance score

Ryzen Threadripper 1950
2017
16 cores / 32 threads, 180 Watt
14.16
EPYC 7F52
2020
16 cores / 32 threads, 240 Watt
26.15
+84.7%

EPYC 7F52 outperforms Ryzen Threadripper 1950 by an impressive 85% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Ryzen Threadripper 1950 and EPYC 7F52 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking526190
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data5.39
Market segmentDesktop processorServer
Seriesno dataAMD EPYC
Power efficiency7.3110.12
Architecture codenameZen (2017−2020)Zen 2 (2017−2020)
Release date29 July 2017 (7 years ago)14 April 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$3,100

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Ryzen Threadripper 1950 and EPYC 7F52 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 cores16 (Hexadeca-Core)16 (Hexadeca-Core)
Threads3232
Base clock speed3.2 GHz3.5 GHz
Boost clock speed3.2 GHz3.9 GHz
Multiplierno data35
L1 cache96K (per core)1 MB
L2 cache512 KB (per core)8 MB
L3 cache32 MB256 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm7 nm, 14 nm
Die size213 mm274 mm2
Number of transistors9,600 million3,800 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplier++

Compatibility

Information on Ryzen Threadripper 1950 and EPYC 7F52 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
SocketSP3r2SP3
Power consumption (TDP)180 Watt240 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen Threadripper 1950 and EPYC 7F52. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI++
AVX++
Precision Boost 2no data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen Threadripper 1950 and EPYC 7F52 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen Threadripper 1950 and EPYC 7F52. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4 Quad-channelDDR4-3200
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 Ryzen Threadripper 1950 and EPYC 7F52.

PCIe versionno data4.0

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.

Ryzen Threadripper 1950 14.16
EPYC 7F52 26.15
+84.7%

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 Threadripper 1950 22077
EPYC 7F52 40756
+84.6%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 14.16 26.15
Recency 29 July 2017 14 April 2020
Chip lithography 14 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 180 Watt 240 Watt

Ryzen Threadripper 1950 has 33.3% lower power consumption.

EPYC 7F52, on the other hand, has a 84.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

The EPYC 7F52 is our recommended choice as it beats the Ryzen Threadripper 1950 in performance tests.

Note that Ryzen Threadripper 1950 is a desktop processor while EPYC 7F52 is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen Threadripper 1950 and EPYC 7F52, 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 Threadripper 1950
Ryzen Threadripper 1950
AMD EPYC 7F52
EPYC 7F52

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.


4.4 20 votes

Rate Ryzen Threadripper 1950 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 9 votes

Rate EPYC 7F52 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Ryzen Threadripper 1950 or EPYC 7F52, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.