AMD EPYC 73F3 vs AMD EPYC 7502P Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits cleanly in favor of the AMD EPYC 7502P across every recorded test. The 7502P wins all six head-to-head comparisons, covering both multicore and singlecore workloads in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23. The EPYC 73F3 does not record a single win in the head-to-head results.

The 7502P's strength lies in its core count. With 32 cores and 64 threads, it is built for heavily threaded server workloads. Its multicore leads are consistent, ranging from 10.7% to 10.8% over the 73F3 depending on the Cinebench version. The R15 multicore test shows the 7502P scoring 4374 against the 73F3's 3949, a 10.8% advantage. In R20 multicore, the margin is 18225 versus 16458, a 10.7% edge. The R23 multicore test follows the same pattern: 43395 versus 39187, again 10.7% ahead.

Singlecore results also favor the 7502P, which is notable because the 73F3 has a higher base clock and boost clock. The 7502P records 617 in Cinebench R15 singlecore versus 557 for the 73F3, a 10.8% lead. In R20 singlecore, the scores are 2572 against 2323, a 10.7% margin. The R23 singlecore test shows 6126 versus 5532, also 10.7% ahead. This suggests that the 7502P's Zen 2 architecture, despite the lower clock speeds, delivers better per-thread performance in these specific workloads.

The 73F3 is the faster processor on paper by clock speed, with a 3.50 GHz base and 4.00 GHz boost against the 7502P's 2.50 GHz base and 3.35 GHz boost. But the recorded benchmark scores do not reflect that advantage. In every measured test, the 7502P wins. Users prioritizing raw threaded throughput or even single-threaded Cinebench scores should look at the 7502P data first.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different generations of AMD's EPYC lineup. The 7502P belongs to the EPYC 7002 series, using the Zen 2 architecture with the Rome codename. The 73F3 uses Zen 3 with the Milan codename. Both are built on a 7 nm process at TSMC, but the similarities end there.

The transistor counts differ substantially. The 7502P packs 3,800 million transistors on a 74 mm² die. The 73F3 uses 33,200 million transistors spread across 8 dies, each measuring 81 mm². This is a major architectural difference: the 7502P is a monolithic design while the 73F3 uses a chiplet-based layout with eight separate compute dies.

Cache configurations also diverge. The 7502P has 96 KB of L1 cache per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 128 MB of shared L3 cache. The 73F3 has 64 KB of L1 per core, the same 512 KB of L2 per core, but doubles the L3 to 256 MB shared. This larger L3 cache on the 73F3 is a key architectural feature, though it does not translate into benchmark wins in the recorded data.

Memory support is identical on paper: both support DDR4 with an eight-channel memory bus and 204.8 GB/s of memory bandwidth. Both support ECC memory. Both use the AMD Socket SP3. PCIe support is Gen 4 for both, though the 73F3 lists 128 lanes from the CPU only, while the 7502P simply lists Gen 4 without a lane count in the database.

The 73F3 carries a launch MSRP of $3521. The 7502P has no recorded launch MSRP in the database.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are uniform: the 7502P wins every test by roughly 10.7% to 10.8%. No test favors the 73F3.

In Cinebench R15 multicore, the 7502P scores 4374 against 3949, a 10.8% advantage. The same percentage appears in R15 singlecore: 617 versus 557. This consistency across multicore and singlecore is unusual, as different architectures typically trade wins depending on thread scaling.

Cinebench R20 repeats the pattern. Multicore shows 18225 for the 7502P and 16458 for the 73F3, a 10.7% lead. Singlecore shows 2572 versus 2323, also 10.7%. The R23 results mirror this exactly: multicore 43395 versus 39187 and singlecore 6126 versus 5532, both 10.7% margins.

The 7502P's average benchmark score across all recorded tests is 10512, placing it in the 66th percentile of all CPUs. The 73F3 has a higher average score of 11334 and sits in the 67th percentile. This is an interesting discrepancy: the 73F3 has a higher average score and percentile, yet loses every head-to-head Cinebench test. The reason is the benchmark set. The 7502P's database includes Geekbench results, where it scores 7822 multicore and 963 singlecore. The 73F3 has no Geekbench scores recorded. Those additional Geekbench data points pull the 7502P's average down relative to the 73F3, which only has Cinebench scores.

The nearest rivals in the database further illustrate the positioning. The 7502P sits near the AMD EPYC 7D12 (0.3% behind), Intel Core i7-4790 (0.4% behind), Intel Xeon W-3175X (1.4% ahead), and Intel Xeon Gold 6338N (1.6% ahead). The 73F3 sits near the AMD EPYC 7402 (0.2% ahead), Intel Core i5-1145G7 (0.5% ahead), AMD EPYC 7452 (0.5% ahead), and Intel Core i3-1305U (1.2% ahead). These rival comparisons are based on average benchmark scores, not head-to-head Cinebench results.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specifications. The 7502P has 32 cores and 64 threads; the 73F3 has 16 cores and 32 threads. That is a 2x core and thread advantage for the 7502P.

Clock speeds favor the 73F3. It has a 3.50 GHz base clock and 4.00 GHz boost clock. The 7502P has a 2.50 GHz base and 3.35 GHz boost. The 73F3's boost clock is 0.65 GHz higher, and its base clock is 1.00 GHz higher.

Thermal design power differs significantly. The 7502P has a TDP of 180 watts; the 73F3 has a TDP of 240 watts. The 73F3 draws more power despite having half the cores, which is consistent with its higher clock speeds and larger L3 cache.

The architecture generation differs: Zen 2 (Rome) for the 7502P versus Zen 3 (Milan) for the 73F3. The process node is the same at 7 nm from TSMC. Transistor counts and die sizes differ as described earlier.

Cache layouts differ in L1 and L3. The 7502P has 96 KB L1 per core and 128 MB shared L3. The 73F3 has 64 KB L1 per core and 256 MB shared L3. L2 cache is identical at 512 KB per core.

Memory support is the same: DDR4, eight-channel, 204.8 GB/s bandwidth, ECC supported. Both use Socket SP3. Both have PCIe Gen 4, though the 73F3 lists 128 lanes from the CPU only. The 7502P has no lane count specified.

Release dates differ. The 7502P was released on 2019-08-06; the 73F3 on 2021-03-14. The 73F3 has a recorded launch MSRP of $3521; the 7502P has none. Both are active in production status and are locked (multiplier not unlocked).

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The AMD EPYC 7502P has 32 cores and 64 threads. The AMD EPYC 73F3 has 16 cores and 32 threads.

Q: Which processor has the higher clock speed?

A: The AMD EPYC 73F3 has a base clock of 3.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.00 GHz. The AMD EPYC 7502P has a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 3.35 GHz.

Q: Does the 73F3 win any benchmark tests?

A: No. In the head-to-head results, the 7502P wins all six tests: Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, both multicore and singlecore, with margins between 10.7% and 10.8%.

Q: Why does the 73F3 have a higher average benchmark score if it loses every head-to-head test?

A: The 73F3 has an average benchmark score of 11334 versus 10512 for the 7502P. This is because the 7502P's database includes Geekbench results (7822 multicore, 963 singlecore), while the 73F3 has no Geekbench scores recorded. The head-to-head comparison only covers Cinebench tests.

Q: What is the TDP difference?

A: The 7502P has a TDP of 180 watts. The 73F3 has a TDP of 240 watts, which is higher despite having fewer cores.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory?

A: Yes. Both support DDR4 with an eight-channel memory bus, 204.8 GB/s of memory bandwidth, and ECC memory. Both use AMD Socket SP3 and PCIe Gen 4.

The Verdict

The data points decisively to the AMD EPYC 7502P for any workload measured in these benchmarks. It wins every Cinebench test, both multicore and singlecore, by roughly 10.7% to 10.8%. It also has double the cores and threads of the 73F3, which matters for heavily threaded server workloads beyond Cinebench.

The 73F3 is not without merit. It has a higher base and boost clock, a larger 256 MB L3 cache, and a newer Zen 3 architecture. Its higher average benchmark score of 11334 and 67th percentile ranking versus the 7502P's 10512 and 66th percentile suggest that in a broader benchmark suite, the 73F3 could perform better. But in the recorded head-to-head data, it does not.

For builders choosing between these two, the decision depends on the workload. If the task is heavily multithreaded rendering or compute that scales with core count, the 7502P is the clear choice based on the Cinebench results and its 32-core configuration. If the task benefits from higher clock speeds and larger cache per core, the 73F3's specifications suggest it could be competitive, but the benchmark data does not confirm this.

The 73F3 also draws 240 watts versus 180 watts for the 7502P, so the 7502P delivers better benchmark performance at lower thermal design power. This is a practical advantage in dense server environments where cooling and power budgets matter.

The 7502P is the safer recommendation from the recorded data. It wins all head-to-head tests, has more cores, and runs cooler. The 73F3's higher clock speeds and larger cache are real architectural advantages, but they do not translate into wins in any of the six measured Cinebench tests. Until other benchmark results show otherwise, the 7502P is the stronger choice for the workloads represented in this database.