EPYC 73F3 vs Xeon 3.0

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

Comparing Xeon 3.0 and EPYC 73F3 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the rankingnot rated153
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data6.30
Market segmentServerServer
Seriesno dataAMD EPYC
Power efficiencyno data11.44
Architecture codenameIrwindale (2004)Milan (2021−2023)
Release dateJune 2004 (20 years ago)15 March 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$3,521

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Xeon 3.0 and EPYC 73F3 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 cores1 (Single-Core)16 (Hexadeca-Core)
Threads132
Base clock speedno data3.5 GHz
Boost clock speed3 GHz4 GHz
Multiplierno data35
L1 cache16 KB64 KB (per core)
L2 cache2 MB512 KB (per core)
L3 cache0 KB256 MB (shared)
Chip lithography90 nm7 nm+
Die size169 mm28x 81 mm2
Number of transistors178 million33,200 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+

Compatibility

Information on Xeon 3.0 and EPYC 73F3 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
Socket604SP3
Power consumption (TDP)135 Watt240 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon 3.0 and EPYC 73F3. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI-+
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon 3.0 and EPYC 73F3 are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon 3.0 and EPYC 73F3. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR4-3200
Maximum memory sizeno data4 TiB
Maximum memory bandwidthno data204.795 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataN/A

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon 3.0 and EPYC 73F3.

PCIe versionno data4.0
PCI Express lanesno data128

Pros & cons summary


Physical cores 1 16
Threads 1 32
Chip lithography 90 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 135 Watt 240 Watt

Xeon 3.0 has 77.8% lower power consumption.

EPYC 73F3, on the other hand, has 1500% more physical cores and 3100% more threads, and a 1185.7% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Xeon 3.0 and EPYC 73F3. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon 3.0 and EPYC 73F3, 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.


Intel Xeon 3.0
Xeon 3.0
AMD EPYC 73F3
EPYC 73F3

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.


No user ratings yet.

Rate Xeon 3.0 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.5 2 votes

Rate EPYC 73F3 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon 3.0 or EPYC 73F3, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.