CPU Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results are unusually one-sided, with the AMD EPYC 73F3 taking all six head-to-head Cinebench tests. The margins are consistent and narrow, ranging from a 1.9% advantage in multi-core workloads to a 2% edge in single-core tests. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the EPYC 73F3 scores 3949 against the EPYC 9224's 3874, a 1.9% gap. The single-core R15 result shows 557 versus 546, translating to a 2% lead for the older chip.

Moving to Cinebench R20, the pattern holds: 16458 versus 16144 in multi-core (1.9% delta) and 2323 versus 2278 in single-core (2% delta). The R23 results mirror this precisely, with the EPYC 73F3 posting 39187 multi-core and 5532 single-core, against 38439 and 5426 for the EPYC 9224. The consistency of these deltas across all three Cinebench versions suggests a fundamental per-core advantage for the EPYC 73F3, not a workload-specific quirk.

What makes this intriguing is the core count disparity. The EPYC 9224 has 24 cores and 48 threads, while the EPYC 73F3 has only 16 cores and 32 threads. Despite having 50% more cores, the EPYC 9224 cannot overtake the EPYC 73F3 in any multi-core test. The EPYC 73F3's average benchmark score of 11334 versus 11118 for the EPYC 9224 reinforces the overall picture, though the 2% edge in average is smaller than the head-to-head deltas might suggest.

The percentile rankings tell a similar story: the EPYC 73F3 sits at the 67th percentile among all CPUs, while the EPYC 9224 is at the 66th percentile. This is a razor-thin overall gap, yet the head-to-head data shows the EPYC 73F3 winning every single test. The nearest rivals for each chip offer context: the EPYC 73F3's closest competitor is the AMD EPYC 7402 at 0.2% delta, while the EPYC 9224's nearest is the AMD EPYC 7542 at -0.3%. Both chips are clustered among similar-performing server parts, but the direct comparison favors the older Milan part.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gulf between these two is substantial, spanning two generations of Zen. The EPYC 73F3 is built on Zen 3 with the Milan codename, fabricated on a 7 nm process at TSMC. The EPYC 9224 uses Zen 4 with the Genoa codename, on a 5 nm process, also at TSMC. The process shrink is significant, but the benchmark data suggests it does not translate into a performance win for the newer part.

Core configuration differs markedly. The EPYC 73F3 has 16 cores and 32 threads, while the EPYC 9224 offers 24 cores and 48 threads. Clock speeds favor the older chip: the EPYC 73F3 runs at a base clock of 3.50 GHz and boosts to 4.00 GHz, whereas the EPYC 9224 has a 2.50 GHz base and 3.70 GHz boost. This clock advantage likely explains the EPYC 73F3's per-core performance edge, which shows up in the consistent single-core wins.

Cache hierarchies diverge significantly. The EPYC 73F3 has a massive 256 MB shared L3 cache, while the EPYC 9224 has only 64 MB shared L3. L2 cache is inverted: 512 KB per core on the EPYC 73F3 versus 1 MB per core on the EPYC 9224. Both have 64 KB L1 per core. The L3 disparity is enormous, four times more shared cache on the older chip, which could benefit workloads with large working sets that fit in cache.

Memory architecture reflects the generational leap. The EPYC 73F3 uses DDR4 with an eight-channel memory bus and 204.8 GB/s bandwidth. The EPYC 9224 moves to DDR5 with a twelve-channel bus and 460.8 GB/s bandwidth, more than double the theoretical throughput. PCIe also advances: Gen 4 with 128 lanes on the EPYC 73F3 versus Gen 5 with 128 lanes on the EPYC 9224. These are major platform-level differences that the Cinebench tests do not capture.

Transistor counts and die sizes tell a story of design choices. The EPYC 73F3 packs 33,200 million transistors across 8x 81 mm² dies, while the EPYC 9224 uses 26,280 million transistors on 4x 72 mm² dies. The newer chip has fewer transistors on smaller dies, reflecting the denser 5 nm process. TDP differs too, with the EPYC 73F3 rated at 240 W and the EPYC 9224 at 200 W, the older chip draws more power but delivers higher clock speeds.

Socket compatibility is entirely different: the EPYC 73F3 uses AMD Socket SP3, while the EPYC 9224 uses AMD Socket SP5. This means no drop-in upgrade path between the two. The EPYC 9224's release date of November 2022 comes over a year and a half after the EPYC 73F3's March 2021 launch, yet the newer silicon fails to outperform in this benchmark suite.

Where Each One Wins

The EPYC 73F3 wins everywhere in the Cinebench suite, but the nature of those wins matters. In single-core tests, the 2% edge is consistent and likely stems from the higher boost clock of 4.00 GHz versus 3.70 GHz. The EPYC 73F3's 557, 2323, and 5532 scores in R15, R20, and R23 single-core respectively demonstrate a clear per-thread advantage. For workloads that are latency-sensitive or lightly threaded, the older chip is the data-backed choice.

Multi-core results are more surprising given the core count gap. The EPYC 73F3 wins by 1.9% in all three multi-core tests, despite having 8 fewer cores. This implies the EPYC 73F3's per-core performance is sufficiently higher to overcome a 33% core deficit. The 256 MB L3 cache may play a role here, allowing more data to be held close to the cores. Workloads that are cache-resident would favor the EPYC 73F3.

The EPYC 9224's advantages are not visible in Cinebench but are documented in its specifications. The twelve-channel DDR5 memory with 460.8 GB/s bandwidth is a major asset for memory-bound applications like large database operations or in-memory analytics. PCIe Gen 5 support doubles the interconnect bandwidth per lane compared to Gen 4, which matters for high-throughput storage or GPU clusters. The lower 200 W TDP could be relevant in dense server environments where power and cooling are constrained.

The EPYC 9224's 24 cores provide more parallel processing capacity for workloads that scale well beyond 16 cores, even if the Cinebench multi-core scores do not reflect it. The larger per-core L2 cache of 1 MB might benefit certain data-intensive threads. In a system with heavy virtualization or many concurrent containers, the core count could be the deciding factor.

The Verdict

The data points decisively toward the AMD EPYC 73F3 for Cinebench performance, with wins in all six head-to-head tests and a higher average benchmark score of 11334 versus 11118. The 67th percentile ranking versus the 66th percentile further supports the older chip's position. For users whose primary workloads resemble Cinebench, rendering, simulation, or other multi-threaded compute, the EPYC 73F3 is the clear choice from a pure performance standpoint.

However, the EPYC 9224's platform advantages are real and could outweigh the benchmark deficit in specific deployments. The DDR5 twelve-channel memory architecture with 460.8 GB/s bandwidth is a generational leap that Cinebench does not stress. The PCIe Gen 5 support and 128 lanes provide future-proofing for next-generation accelerators and storage devices. The lower 200 W TDP means less heat generation and potentially higher density in server racks.

The verdict depends on workload characteristics. If the application is compute-bound with substantial cache reuse, the EPYC 73F3's 256 MB L3 and higher clocks deliver measurable wins. If the application is memory-bandwidth-bound or needs maximum core count for horizontal scaling, the EPYC 9224's 24 cores and DDR5 bandwidth present a compelling argument. The launch MSRP of the EPYC 73F3 is $3521, while the EPYC 9224 is $1825, a notable difference, though pricing considerations are secondary to the performance data.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The AMD EPYC 73F3 scores 39187 versus the EPYC 9224's 38439, a 1.9% advantage for the EPYC 73F3.

Q: What is the core and thread count difference?

A: The EPYC 73F3 has 16 cores and 32 threads, while the EPYC 9224 has 24 cores and 48 threads, a 50% core advantage for the EPYC 9224.

Q: Which chip has higher clock speeds?

A: The EPYC 73F3 runs at 3.50 GHz base and 4.00 GHz boost, compared to the EPYC 9224's 2.50 GHz base and 3.70 GHz boost.

Q: How do the memory architectures differ?

A: The EPYC 73F3 uses DDR4 with eight-channel memory and 204.8 GB/s bandwidth, while the EPYC 9224 uses DDR5 with twelve-channel memory and 460.8 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What is the L3 cache size difference?

A: The EPYC 73F3 has 256 MB shared L3 cache, while the EPYC 9224 has 64 MB shared L3, four times more on the EPYC 73F3.

Q: Which chip has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The EPYC 73F3 averages 11334 across benchmarks, versus 11118 for the EPYC 9224, and sits at the 67th percentile compared to the EPYC 9224's 66th percentile.

Specification Differences

| Field | AMD EPYC 73F3 | AMD EPYC 9224 |

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

| Cores | 16 | 24 |

| Threads | 32 | 48 |

| Base Clock | 3.50 GHz | 2.50 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.00 GHz | 3.70 GHz |

| TDP | 240 W | 200 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket SP3 | AMD Socket SP5 |

| Architecture | Zen 3 | Zen 4 |

| Codename | Milan | Genoa |

| Generation | EPYC (Zen 3 (Milan)) | EPYC (Zen 4 (Genoa)) |

| Process Node | 7 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | 33,200 million | 26,280 million |

| Die Size | 8x 81 mm² | 4x 72 mm² |

| L2 Cache | 512 KB (per core) | 1 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 256 MB (shared) | 64 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4 | DDR5 |

| Memory Bus | Eight-channel | Twelve-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 204.8 GB/s | 460.8 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 128 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 128 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Release Date | 2021-03-14 | 2022-11-09 |

| Launch MSRP | $3521 | $1825 |

| Part Number | 100-000000321100-100000321WOF | 100-100000939 |

| Avg Benchmark Score | 11334 | 11118 |

| Percentile vs All CPUs | 67 | 66 |