AMD EPYC 7301 vs AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 4650GE Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 4650GE and the AMD EPYC 7301 occupy opposite ends of the hardware spectrum: one is a 35-watt desktop APU with integrated graphics, the other a 170-watt server behemoth with 16 cores. Despite the EPYC’s massive core advantage, the benchmark data tells a surprisingly consistent story—the Ryzen 5 PRO wins every single head-to-head test, but by margins that are far narrower than the architectural gap suggests. The average benchmark scores confirm this: the 4650GE sits at 3732, while the EPYC 7301 trails at 3685. Both processors land in the 56th percentile of all CPUs, meaning they are statistically peers in overall performance, even if their intended workloads could not be more different.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking pattern in the head-to-head data is the uniformity of the Ryzen 5 PRO’s victories. Across all six Cinebench tests, the 4650GE wins by a margin between 2.2% and 2.4%. The smallest gap appears in Cinebench R15 single-core, where the Ryzen scores 185 against the EPYC’s 181, a 2.2% lead. The largest deltas are a 2.4% advantage in Cinebench R20 multi-core (5478 vs 5351), R20 single-core (773 vs 755), and R23 multi-core (13044 vs 12742). This consistency is remarkable: the EPYC’s 16 cores and 32 threads cannot overcome the Ryzen’s newer Zen 2 architecture and much higher clock speeds, even in heavily threaded workloads.

The single-core results highlight the biggest chasm. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the 4650GE posts 1841, while the EPYC 7301 manages only 1798—a 2.4% edge for the desktop chip. This gap stems directly from clock speed: the Ryzen boosts to 4.20 GHz, while the EPYC tops out at 2.70 GHz. The multi-core results are closer, which is expected given the EPYC’s 16 cores versus the Ryzen’s 6. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Ryzen scores 1314 against the EPYC’s 1284, a 2.3% win. The EPYC’s extra cores almost compensate for its slower architecture, but not quite. The data shows that Zen 2’s per-core efficiency is so much higher than the original Zen’s that a 6-core, 12-thread chip can beat a 16-core, 32-thread server part in every Cinebench iteration.

Notably, the Ryzen 5 PRO also has Geekbench scores that the EPYC lacks entirely—5710 multi-core and 1513 single-core. While not directly comparable in a head-to-head table, these figures add context: the 4650GE is a well-rounded performer across multiple benchmark suites, not just Cinebench. The EPYC 7301 has no Geekbench data in the pack, so its standing there is unknown, but its Cinebench results suggest it would struggle to match the Ryzen’s single-threaded output.

Where Each One Wins

The Ryzen 5 PRO 4650GE wins in every measured benchmark, but that does not mean the EPYC 7301 is without purpose. The data shows the 4650GE dominates in all six Cinebench tests, making it the clear choice for any workload that prioritizes raw per-core performance, responsiveness, or power efficiency. Its 35-watt TDP and integrated Radeon Vega 7 graphics mean it can drive a display and handle light GPU tasks without a discrete card, which is ideal for compact desktops or office systems where space and heat are constraints.

The EPYC 7301’s wins are not in benchmark scores but in platform characteristics. It offers an eight-channel memory bus with 170.6 GB/s bandwidth, compared to the Ryzen’s dual-channel 51.2 GB/s. That bandwidth advantage is enormous—over three times higher—and directly benefits memory-bound server workloads like virtualization, database caching, or high-performance computing. The EPYC also has 64 MB of shared L3 cache versus the Ryzen’s 8 MB, which can improve hit rates in large working sets. Its 16 cores and 32 threads provide raw parallelism that the Ryzen cannot match, even if the Cinebench scores suggest the Ryzen’s efficiency offsets that core count in this specific benchmark suite.

For single-threaded tasks, the 4650GE is the obvious winner. Its 4.20 GHz boost clock and Zen 2 architecture deliver a 2.4% edge in Cinebench R23 single-core, and that advantage compounds in real-world applications that are latency-sensitive. For heavily parallel server workloads, the EPYC’s core count and memory bandwidth are the selling points, even if the benchmark scores in this pack do not reflect a win.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two chips is generational. The Ryzen 5 PRO 4650GE uses Zen 2, codenamed Renoir, built on TSMC’s 7 nm process. It packs 9,800 million transistors into a 156 mm² die. The EPYC 7301 uses the original Zen architecture, codenamed Naples, on GlobalFoundries’ 14 nm process, with 4,800 million transistors on a 213 mm² die. The node shrink explains much of the performance gap: Zen 2’s 7 nm process allows higher clocks at lower power, which is why the 4650GE can boost to 4.20 GHz at just 35 watts while the EPYC tops out at 2.70 GHz with a 170-watt TDP.

Cache layouts also differ significantly. The 4650GE has 64 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of shared L3. The EPYC 7301 has 96 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and a massive 64 MB of shared L3. The EPYC’s larger per-core L1 and eight times more L3 cache are designed for server workloads with large datasets, while the Ryzen’s smaller cache is sufficient for desktop tasks. Both support DDR4 memory and ECC, but the EPYC’s eight-channel memory bus dwarfs the Ryzen’s dual-channel setup, translating to 170.6 GB/s versus 51.2 GB/s.

The integrated graphics are a major differentiator. The 4650GE includes Radeon Vega 7, making it a complete APU solution. The EPYC 7301 has no integrated graphics at all, requiring a discrete GPU for any display output. The Ryzen also has a locked multiplier, while the EPYC is multiplier-unlocked, though overclocking a 170-watt server chip is an unusual use case. Both use PCIe Gen 3, but the sockets are incompatible: the 4650GE fits AMD Socket AM4, while the EPYC uses AMD Socket SP3.

Specification Differences

The core and thread counts are the most obvious difference: the 4650GE has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the EPYC 7301 has 16 cores and 32 threads. Clock speeds favor the Ryzen, with a 3.30 GHz base and 4.20 GHz boost versus the EPYC’s 2.20 GHz base and 2.70 GHz boost. TDP is a stark contrast—35 watts for the Ryzen versus 170 watts for the EPYC. The process node differs (7 nm TSMC vs 14 nm GlobalFoundries), as do transistor counts (9,800 million vs 4,800 million) and die sizes (156 mm² vs 213 mm²).

Memory configurations are fundamentally different. The 4650GE supports dual-channel DDR4 with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth, while the EPYC 7301 supports eight-channel DDR4 with 170.6 GB/s bandwidth. L3 cache is 8 MB shared on the Ryzen versus 64 MB shared on the EPYC. L1 cache per core is 64 KB on the Ryzen and 96 KB on the EPYC; L2 remains 512 KB per core on both. The Ryzen includes Radeon Vega 7 integrated graphics; the EPYC has none. The Ryzen’s multiplier is locked; the EPYC’s is unlocked. Release dates differ by over three years—the 4650GE launched in July 2020, while the EPYC 7301 launched in June 2017. The Ryzen targets the desktop market segment, while the EPYC is a server/workstation part.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster in multi-core Cinebench tests?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 4650GE wins all three multi-core Cinebench tests: R15 (1314 vs 1284), R20 (5478 vs 5351), and R23 (13044 vs 12742). The margins are 2.3% to 2.4%.

Q: Does the EPYC 7301 have any benchmark wins over the 4650GE?

A: No. In the head-to-head data, the 4650GE wins all six Cinebench tests. The EPYC 7301 has zero wins across the measured benchmarks.

Q: Why does the 6-core Ryzen beat the 16-core EPYC in multi-threaded tests?

A: The Ryzen’s Zen 2 architecture on a 7 nm process allows a 4.20 GHz boost clock versus the EPYC’s 2.70 GHz. The Ryzen’s higher per-core efficiency more than compensates for the EPYC’s additional 10 cores and 20 threads.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference between the two chips?

A: The EPYC 7301 has an eight-channel memory bus delivering 170.6 GB/s, while the 4650GE has a dual-channel bus at 51.2 GB/s. The EPYC offers over three times the bandwidth.

Q: Does the Ryzen 5 PRO 4650GE have integrated graphics?

A: Yes, it includes Radeon Vega 7. The EPYC 7301 has no integrated graphics, so it requires a discrete GPU for display output.

Q: Are both CPUs still in production?

A: Yes, both the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 4650GE and the AMD EPYC 7301 have an active production status.

The Verdict

The data paints a clear picture for single-threaded and efficiency-focused builds: the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 4650GE is the superior processor by every benchmark metric in this comparison. It wins all six Cinebench tests, posts strong Geekbench scores (5710 multi-core, 1513 single-core), and does so at a 35-watt TDP with integrated graphics. For a desktop user who needs a capable all-in-one chip for everyday tasks, light content creation, or office productivity, the 4650GE is the obvious choice. Its lock on single-core performance and its 2.4% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core over a chip with over twice the cores reflects Zen 2’s efficiency.

The AMD EPYC 7301 is not a bad processor—it is just built for a different job. Its 16 cores, 32 threads, eight-channel memory bandwidth (170.6 GB/s), and 64 MB of L3 cache are designed for server workloads that the benchmark suite here does not fully capture. In memory-bound or massively parallel enterprise applications, the EPYC’s platform advantages could outweigh its Cinebench deficits. However, the data provided shows no scenario where the EPYC wins a benchmark. For builders choosing between these two, the decision comes down to socket and platform: if you need SP3, eight-channel memory, and a server-grade feature set, the EPYC 7301 is the only option. If you need a desktop processor that outperforms it in every measured test while consuming a fraction of the power, the Ryzen 5 PRO 4650GE is the definitive pick. The 56th percentile ranking for both chips confirms they are evenly matched in aggregate, but the Ryzen’s wins are consistent and measurable, making it the stronger choice for any workload represented in this data.