AMD EPYC 7252 vs AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C48 Comparison

Two AMD processors with identical core counts sit side by side in the database, yet they come from entirely different worlds: a socketed server chip and an embedded mobile part. The AMD EPYC 7252 and the AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C48 both offer 8 cores and 16 threads, and both land in the 59th percentile versus all CPUs in the database. But the recorded benchmark data tells a story of a clean sweep in one direction, and the specification sheets explain why. What follows is a look at where each chip's advantages actually lie.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Ryzen Embedded V3C48 wins every single one of the six recorded Cinebench tests, and it wins them by a remarkably consistent margin.

In Cinebench R15, the V3C48 posts a multi-core score of 1730 against the EPYC 7252's 1662, a 3.9% gap. Single-core goes the same way: 244 versus 234, a 4.1% advantage for the embedded part. That single-core result is the largest delta in the entire head-to-head set, and it aligns neatly with the clock specifications: the V3C48 boosts to 3.80 GHz while the EPYC 7252 tops out at 3.20 GHz.

Cinebench R20 repeats the pattern. Multi-core reads 7212 for the V3C48 and 6929 for the EPYC 7252, again 3.9% apart. Single-core is 1018 versus 978, also 3.9%.

Cinebench R23, the most demanding of the three renders, closes out the sweep: 17172 versus 16499 in multi-core and 2424 versus 2329 in single-core, both deltas at 3.9%.

The uniformity is the interesting part. When a newer architecture with substantially higher boost clocks wins every test by nearly the same percentage, the data suggests the gap is a straightforward per-core throughput difference rather than a scheduling or thermal quirk. The EPYC 7252 simply never finds a workload in this suite where its platform advantages translate into a Cinebench win.

Where Each One Wins

Strictly on the recorded benchmark results, the V3C48 wins everywhere in this suite: multi-core rendering, single-core responsiveness, older Cinebench versions, newer ones. Six tests, six wins, margins between 3.9% and 4.1%.

But raw benchmark scores are not the whole picture, and the database specification data points to workloads where the EPYC 7252 holds structural advantages that Cinebench cannot measure. Its eight-channel DDR4 memory bus delivers 85.3 GB/s of bandwidth against the V3C48's dual-channel 76.8 GB/s, an edge for memory-hungry server workloads. Its PCIe subsystem is far wider, with 128 Gen 4 lanes versus 20, which matters for storage arrays, GPU clusters, and network cards.

So the split looks like this: for single-socket compute throughput per core, the V3C48 is the faster processor in every recorded test. For expandability, memory bandwidth, and multi-device server duty, the EPYC 7252 is the only one of the two actually built for that job, as its Server/Workstation market segment indicates.

Architecture Differences

The two chips sit three architectural generations apart in AMD's lineup. The EPYC 7252 is a Zen 2 design, codename Rome, fabricated on TSMC's 7 nm process. The V3C48 is Zen 3+, codename Rembrandt, built on TSMC's 6 nm process. That newer process plus the newer core design is the most plausible explanation for the clock and efficiency gap: the V3C48 runs a 3.30 GHz base and 3.80 GHz boost on a 45 W TDP, while the EPYC 7252 runs 3.10 GHz base and 3.20 GHz boost on a 120 W TDP.

Cache configurations diverge sharply. The EPYC 7252 is a dual-die part, with two 74 mm² dies and 7600 million transistors, carrying 32 MB of L3 per die for 64 MB total. The V3C48 has a single shared 16 MB L3 pool. That fourfold L3 advantage is the EPYC's architectural counterpunch, even though it does not show up in these particular Cinebench runs.

Platform details differ just as much. The EPYC uses Socket SP3, DDR4 memory across eight channels, and 128 Gen 4 PCIe lanes. The V3C48 uses Socket FP7, DDR5 across two channels, and 20 Gen 4 lanes. Both support ECC memory, a point of parity worth noting given how rarely it appears on desktop-class parts. Neither has integrated graphics, and both have locked multipliers. The EPYC 7252 launched on August 6, 2019 at a launch MSRP of $475; the V3C48 arrived September 26, 2022 with no launch MSRP recorded in the database.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster in benchmarks?

A: The Ryzen Embedded V3C48, in all six recorded tests. It leads by 3.9% to 4.1% across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, in both multi-core and single-core modes.

Q: Do they have the same core count?

A: Yes. Both are 8-core, 16-thread processors. The performance gap comes from architecture and clocks, not core counts.

Q: Which has more cache?

A: The EPYC 7252, by a large margin. It carries 64 MB of total L3 across two dies versus the V3C48's 16 MB shared L3. Both have identical per-core L1 (64 KB) and L2 (512 KB).

Q: Which uses less power?

A: The V3C48, with a 45 W TDP versus 120 W for the EPYC 7252, despite running both a higher base clock and a higher boost clock.

Q: Which memory and platform does each support?

A: The EPYC 7252 uses eight-channel DDR4 at 85.3 GB/s with 128 PCIe Gen 4 lanes on Socket SP3. The V3C48 uses dual-channel DDR5 at 76.8 GB/s with 20 PCIe Gen 4 lanes on Socket FP7. Both support ECC.

Q: How do they compare to other CPUs in the database?

A: Both sit in the 59th percentile against all CPUs. The EPYC 7252's average score of 4772 puts it within a fraction of a percent of rivals like the Intel Xeon W-1290E and Core i5-1350P, while the V3C48's 4967 average sits comparably close to the Intel Core i5-12600HE and Core i7-1375PRE.

The Verdict

For pure compute throughput, the data is unambiguous: the Ryzen Embedded V3C48 wins every recorded benchmark by roughly 4%, does so at roughly a third of the TDP, and achieves it on a newer 6 nm Zen 3+ design. If the decision is purely about rendering or per-core speed, the V3C48 is the pick.

The EPYC 7252 argues back on infrastructure. Four times the L3 cache, higher memory bandwidth, and 128 PCIe lanes make it the only choice here for storage-dense or accelerator-heavy server builds. It sits in a different socket and a different market segment entirely, so the real question is what the system needs to host. If the answer is many devices and much memory, the benchmark deficit is the price of a server platform. If the answer is simply fast 8-core compute, the V3C48 delivers it more efficiently.

Specification Differences

| Field | AMD EPYC 7252 | AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C48 |

|---|---|---|

| Base Clock | 3.10 GHz | 3.30 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.20 GHz | 3.80 GHz |

| TDP | 120 W | 45 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket SP3 | AMD Socket FP7 |

| Architecture | Zen 2 (Rome) | Zen 3+ (Rembrandt) |

| Process Node | 7 nm (TSMC) | 6 nm (TSMC) |

| Transistors | 7,600 million | Not recorded |

| Die Size | 2x 74 mm² | Not recorded |

| L3 Cache | 32 MB per die, 64 MB total | 16 MB shared |

| Memory Support | DDR4 | DDR5 |

| Memory Bus | Eight-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 85.3 GB/s | 76.8 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 128 lanes | Gen 4, 20 lanes |

| Market Segment | Server/Workstation | Desktop |

| Release Date | 2019-08-06 | 2022-09-26 |

| Launch MSRP | $475 | Not recorded |

| Avg Benchmark Score | 4772 | 4967 |

Fields where the two match: 8 cores, 16 threads, per-core L1 and L2 cache, ECC support, no integrated graphics, locked multiplier, TSMC manufacturing, active production status, and 59th percentile standing against all CPUs in the database.