AMD EPYC 7282 vs AMD EPYC 7302P Comparison

Both the AMD EPYC 7282 and the AMD EPYC 7302P are 16-core, 32-thread Zen 2 Rome processors built for the SP3 socket, but the benchmark data draws a clear and consistent line between them. Across every single test in the comparison, the EPYC 7302P posts higher scores, making the performance hierarchy straightforward. The EPYC 7282 is the lower-clocked, lower-power part in the pair, while the 7302P carries higher base and boost clocks alongside a larger cache footprint and more memory bandwidth, and the data shows those architectural advantages translating directly into measurable wins.

Where Each One Wins

The EPYC 7302P wins everywhere. The head-to-head benchmark table shows a clean sweep: six tests, six wins for the 7302P, zero for the 7282. This is not a case where one chip takes single-threaded workloads and the other takes multi-threaded ones; the 7302P dominates both categories. In Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, the 7302P leads in both single-core and multi-core runs. The consistency is notable — every delta is exactly -7.8% from the perspective of the 7282, meaning the performance gap is uniform across all six benchmarks rather than scaling with thread count or workload type.

If a workload is built around Cinebench-style rendering, the 7302P is the clear pick. The largest absolute margin comes in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the 7302P scores 27,786 against the 7282’s 25,616, a difference of 2,170 points. The single-core margin in that same test is smaller in absolute terms — 3,922 versus 3,616 — but still a decisive 306-point gap. The 7302P also holds an advantage in the Geekbench tests, though those results are only listed for the 7302P (multi-core 7,462, single-core 1,114); the 7282 does not have Geekbench entries in the data pack, so no direct comparison is possible there.

For users who care about raw throughput in threaded rendering tasks, the 7302P is the only rational choice between these two. There is no benchmark in the available data where the 7282 pulls ahead, not even in a power-constrained or thermally limited scenario — the scores simply do not reflect any such advantage.

The Verdict

The verdict is unambiguous: pick the AMD EPYC 7302P if performance is the priority, because it out-scores the EPYC 7282 in every measured category. The 7302P delivers a 7.8% improvement across all six Cinebench tests, which translates to meaningful gains in both single-threaded and multi-threaded workloads. Its average benchmark score of 7,100 also places it above the 7282’s average of 7,409? No — wait, that is inverted. The data shows the 7282 has an average benchmark score of 7,409, while the 7302P sits at 7,100, yet the 7302P wins all head-to-head tests. This discrepancy is explained by the fact that the 7282’s average includes its Cinebench results and no Geekbench data, while the 7302P’s average includes lower Geekbench scores (7,462 multi-core, 1,114 single-core) that drag its mean down. In direct comparisons, however, the 7302P is faster.

Choose the EPYC 7282 only if the 120W TDP is a hard constraint, as the 7302P draws 155W. The 7282 also has a lower launch MSRP of $650 versus $825 for the 7302P. But on pure benchmark performance, the 7302P is the winner in every test listed. Both chips share the same 63rd percentile ranking among all CPUs, indicating they sit at a similar overall performance tier, but within that tier the 7302P is measurably quicker.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most telling result is the uniformity of the delta. Every head-to-head Cinebench test shows the 7302P winning by exactly 7.8%, from R15 single-core (395 vs 364) to R23 multi-core (27,786 vs 25,616). This consistent gap suggests a clock-speed-driven difference rather than a core-count or cache-effect difference, since both chips have 16 cores and 32 threads.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the 7302P scores 2,800 versus 2,581 for the 7282 — a 219-point lead. The single-core R15 test shows a 31-point gap (395 vs 364). Moving to R20, the multi-core margin grows to 912 points (11,670 vs 10,758), and the single-core gap is 129 points (1,647 vs 1,518). The largest absolute multi-core win is in R23, where the 7302P leads by 2,170 points (27,786 vs 25,616), and the single-core R23 gap is 306 points (3,922 vs 3,616).

The 7302P’s base clock of 3.00 GHz and boost clock of 3.30 GHz both exceed the 7282’s 2.80 GHz base and 3.20 GHz boost. That 200 MHz base-clock advantage and 100 MHz boost-clock edge likely explain the uniform 7.8% delta, as the percentage difference in clock speed is roughly similar. The 7302P also carries 128 MB of total L3 cache versus 64 MB on the 7282, and its memory bandwidth is rated at 204.8 GB/s compared to 85.3 GB/s — a massive 2.4x difference that could matter in bandwidth-hungry server workloads, though the Cinebench results do not show a scaling advantage beyond the uniform 7.8%.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster in multi-core workloads?

A: The AMD EPYC 7302P wins every multi-core benchmark in the comparison. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 27,786 against the EPYC 7282’s 25,616, a 7.8% lead. The same 7.8% delta appears in Cinebench R15 (2,800 vs 2,581) and R20 (11,670 vs 10,758) multi-core tests.

Q: Is the single-core performance gap the same as the multi-core gap?

A: Yes. The head-to-head data shows a -7.8% delta for the EPYC 7282 across all six Cinebench tests, including single-core runs. For example, in R23 single-core, the 7302P scores 3,922 versus 3,616 for the 7282.

Q: Do both CPUs have the same core and thread counts?

A: Yes. Both the EPYC 7282 and EPYC 7302P have 16 cores and 32 threads, built on the Zen 2 architecture with the Rome codename, and both use the AMD Socket SP3.

Q: What are the clock speed differences?

A: The EPYC 7302P has a 3.00 GHz base clock and 3.30 GHz boost clock. The EPYC 7282 has a 2.80 GHz base clock and 3.20 GHz boost clock. The 7302P is higher in both metrics.

Q: How do their cache and memory specs compare?

A: The EPYC 7302P has 128 MB of total L3 cache, while the EPYC 7282 has 64 MB. Memory bandwidth also differs significantly: the 7302P delivers 204.8 GB/s versus 85.3 GB/s for the 7282, though both support DDR4 with an eight-channel memory bus.

Q: Which CPU has a lower TDP?

A: The EPYC 7282 has a TDP of 120W, while the EPYC 7302P is rated at 155W. The 7282 also has a lower launch MSRP of $650 compared to $825 for the 7302P.

Architecture Differences

Both processors share the same fundamental architecture: Zen 2, codename Rome, manufactured on a 7 nm process at TSMC, and designed for the AMD Socket SP3 platform. They are both part of the EPYC 7002 series and target the server/workstation market segment. The core counts are identical at 16 cores and 32 threads, and both have 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 512 KB of L2 cache per core.

The differences begin with the physical implementation. The EPYC 7282 uses 7,600 million transistors spread across a 2x 74 mm² die configuration, while the EPYC 7302P uses 15,200 million transistors across a 4x 74 mm² configuration. This doubling of compute dies explains the larger L3 cache on the 7302P: 32 MB per die totals 128 MB across four dies, versus 64 MB total on the two-die 7282. The memory bandwidth difference is also tied to this layout — the 7302P’s 204.8 GB/s versus 85.3 GB/s suggests a wider effective memory path, even though both are listed with eight-channel DDR4 support.

Clock speeds favor the 7302P, with a 3.00 GHz base and 3.30 GHz boost versus 2.80 GHz and 3.20 GHz on the 7282. The TDP reflects this: 155W for the 7302P, 120W for the 7282. Both support PCIe Gen 4 with 128 lanes from the CPU, both support ECC memory, and neither has integrated graphics or an unlocked multiplier. The 7302P’s transistor count is exactly double the 7282’s, and its die count is double as well, pointing to a fundamentally different chiplet configuration despite the identical core count. Both launched on the same date, 2019-08-06, and both remain in active production. The 7302P’s nearest rivals in the database include the Intel Core i9-7980XE (average score 7,018, with the 7302P 1.2% ahead) and the Intel Xeon Platinum 8260 (7,018? No, 6,992, with the 7302P 1.6% ahead), while the 7282’s rivals include the Intel Core i9-9990XE (7,415, with the 7282 0.1% behind) and the Intel Core i9-9980XE (7,398, with the 7282 0.2% ahead).