AMD EPYC 72F3 vs AMD Ryzen 3 3200G Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 3 3200G and the AMD EPYC 72F3 are both AMD processors, but they target completely different worlds. The 3200G is a 4-core desktop APU with integrated graphics, a 65 W TDP, and an unlocked multiplier. The 72F3 is an 8-core server processor with 16 threads, a 256 MB L3 cache, and eight-channel memory support. The recorded benchmark data shows a one-sided contest in compute workloads, yet the two chips are not really competitors. They serve different sockets, different platforms, and different buyers.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The EPYC 72F3 has 8 cores and 16 threads. The Ryzen 3 3200G has 4 cores and 4 threads.

Q: Does either chip include integrated graphics?

A: Only the Ryzen 3 3200G includes Radeon Vega 8 integrated graphics. The EPYC 72F3 has no integrated graphics at all.

Q: Which CPU supports ECC memory?

A: The EPYC 72F3 supports ECC memory. The Ryzen 3 3200G does not.

Q: How do the memory channels compare?

A: The EPYC 72F3 uses an eight-channel memory bus with 204.8 GB/s of bandwidth. The Ryzen 3 3200G uses a dual-channel DDR4 bus.

Q: Which chip wins in Cinebench?

A: The EPYC 72F3 wins all six head-to-head Cinebench tests. The deltas range from -74.3% to -74.5%, meaning the Ryzen trails the EPYC by that margin in every test.

Q: What are the release dates?

A: The Ryzen 3 3200G was released on 2019-07-06. The EPYC 72F3 was released on 2021-03-14.

Architecture Differences

The two chips come from different generations and different foundries. The Ryzen 3 3200G belongs to the 3000 series and uses the Zen+ architecture, codename Picasso, built on a 12 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The EPYC 72F3 uses Zen 3, codename Milan, built on a 7 nm process at TSMC. The transistor counts reflect the scale difference: 4,940 million for the Ryzen versus 33,200 million for the EPYC. The die layout also differs, with the Ryzen at 210 mm² and the EPYC using 8x 81 mm² chiplets.

Cache is the biggest architectural gap. The Ryzen has 96 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 4 MB of shared L3. The EPYC has 64 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 256 MB of shared L3. That 256 MB L3 is a server-class feature that dwarfs the Ryzen's 4 MB by a wide margin.

Memory support diverges sharply. Both support DDR4, but the Ryzen is dual-channel while the EPYC is eight-channel with 204.8 GB/s of bandwidth. The EPYC also supports ECC memory; the Ryzen does not. PCIe connectivity differs as well: the Ryzen offers Gen 3, while the EPYC offers Gen 4 with 128 lanes (CPU only).

The Ryzen includes Radeon Vega 8 integrated graphics, which the EPYC lacks entirely. The EPYC is a server and workstation part on Socket SP3, while the Ryzen is a desktop part on Socket AM4. The Ryzen has an unlocked multiplier; the EPYC does not. The base clocks are close, 3.60 GHz versus 3.70 GHz, and the boost clocks are 4.00 GHz versus 4.10 GHz, but the architectural differences are far more significant than the clock gaps.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data covers six Cinebench tests, and the EPYC 72F3 wins all of them. The Ryzen 3 3200G does not win a single recorded comparison.

In Cinebench R15 multicore, the EPYC scores 2334 against 600 for the Ryzen, a delta of -74.3%. The single-core R15 test shows 329 versus 84, a delta of -74.5%. The pattern holds in R20: multicore 9728 versus 2501, a delta of -74.3%, and single-core 1373 versus 352, a delta of -74.4%. In R23, the EPYC scores 23164 multicore and 3270 single-core, while the Ryzen scores 5955 and 840, both with a -74.3% delta.

The consistency of the gap is striking. Every Cinebench test, whether single-threaded or multi-threaded, lands at roughly the same 74.3% deficit for the Ryzen. That suggests the EPYC's advantage comes from its newer Zen 3 cores, its higher boost clock of 4.10 GHz versus 4.00 GHz, and its additional cores and threads.

The Ryzen's own benchmark profile shows it is competitive in its own weight class. Its average benchmark score is 6931, and it sits at the 63rd percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i9-9960X at a delta of -0.1% and the Intel Core i5-3470 at 0.4%. The EPYC 72F3 has an average score of 6700 and sits at the 62nd percentile, with nearest rivals including the Intel Xeon Gold 5317 at -0.1% and the Intel Core i9-9940X at 0.6%. So while the EPYC dominates the Ryzen in these Cinebench tests, the two chips occupy similar percentile positions relative to the broader CPU market.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every specification field:

• Cores: 4 (Ryzen) versus 8 (EPYC)
• Threads: 4 versus 16
• Base clock: 3.60 GHz versus 3.70 GHz
• Boost clock: 4.00 GHz versus 4.10 GHz
• TDP: 65 W versus 180 W
• Socket: AM4 versus SP3
• Architecture: Zen+ versus Zen 3
• Process node: 12 nm versus 7 nm
• Foundry: GlobalFoundries versus TSMC
• Transistors: 4,940 million versus 33,200 million
• Die size: 210 mm² versus 8x 81 mm²
• L1 cache: 96 KB per core versus 64 KB per core
• L3 cache: 4 MB shared versus 256 MB shared
• Memory bus: dual-channel versus eight-channel
• Memory bandwidth: the EPYC lists 204.8 GB/s; the Ryzen has no recorded figure
• ECC: no versus yes
• PCIe: Gen 3 versus Gen 4, 128 lanes (CPU only)
• Integrated graphics: Radeon Vega 8 versus none
• Market segment: Desktop versus Server/Workstation
• Release date: 2019-07-06 versus 2021-03-14
• Multiplier: unlocked versus locked
• Launch MSRP: the EPYC 72F3 has a launch MSRP of $2468

The L2 cache is identical at 512 KB per core, and both support DDR4 memory, so those fields do not differentiate the two.

Where Each One Wins

The Ryzen 3 3200G wins in the areas that matter for a desktop APU. It has integrated Radeon Vega 8 graphics, so it can drive a display without a discrete GPU. It has a 65 W TDP, which keeps cooling requirements low in a compact desktop. It uses Socket AM4, a mainstream desktop platform, and it has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking. Its benchmark profile includes 3DMark scores of 1953 in the 16-thread test, 1003 in the 2-thread test, 1938 in the 4-thread test, 1945 in the 8-thread test, 1939 in the max-threads test, and 498 in the single-thread test. It also records Geekbench scores of 2833 multicore and 884 single-core, plus PassMark results including 20141 in integer math, 13059 in floating point math, and 85374 in data compression.

The EPYC 72F3 wins in raw compute. It has 8 cores and 16 threads, a 256 MB L3 cache, eight-channel memory with 204.8 GB/s bandwidth, ECC support, and PCIe Gen 4 with 128 lanes. It dominates every Cinebench test in the head-to-head comparison. It is built for server and workstation workloads where memory capacity, ECC reliability, and PCIe expansion matter more than integrated graphics.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split. For a desktop build that needs integrated graphics, low power draw, and overclocking, the Ryzen 3 3200G is the appropriate choice. It has the only integrated GPU in this comparison, a 65 W TDP, and an unlocked multiplier. Its average benchmark score of 6931 and 63rd percentile ranking show it is a capable entry-level desktop part.

For server or workstation workloads that demand multi-threaded performance, memory bandwidth, and ECC, the EPYC 72F3 is the pick. It wins all six head-to-head Cinebench tests with deltas of -74.3% to -74.5%. Its 8 cores, 16 threads, 256 MB L3, and eight-channel memory bus are server-class features.

The choice is not about which is better in a general sense. It is about matching the processor to the platform. The Ryzen 3 3200G belongs in a mainstream desktop. The EPYC 72F3 belongs in a server or workstation. The benchmark results confirm that the EPYC is far ahead in compute, but the Ryzen offers capabilities the EPYC does not have, namely integrated graphics and a desktop-friendly power envelope.