AMD EPYC 73F3 vs AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 and the AMD EPYC 73F3 are both server-class processors, but they represent fundamentally different design philosophies. The Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 is a 12-core, 24-thread Zen 4 part built on a 5 nm process, while the EPYC 73F3 is a 16-core, 32-thread Zen 3 part built on a 7 nm process. The benchmark data shows a remarkably consistent, albeit narrow, pattern of performance across all tested workloads.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are striking in their uniformity. The Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 wins every single benchmark in the comparison suite, taking all six tests. However, the margins are extremely tight, never exceeding a 1.3% delta. This indicates that while the newer architecture of the Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 gives it a consistent edge, the EPYC 73F3’s higher core count keeps the competition close.

In the Cinebench R15 multi-core test, the Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 scores 3996 against the EPYC 73F3’s 3949, a 1.2% advantage. The single-core R15 result is similar, with the Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 posting 564 versus 557, a 1.3% lead – the largest margin in either direction across the entire comparison. Moving to Cinebench R20, the multi-core scores are 16654 for the Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 and 16458 for the EPYC 73F3, again a 1.2% difference. The single-core R20 result shows the Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 at 2351 and the EPYC 73F3 at 2323, a 1.2% gap.

The pattern holds in the most demanding workload, Cinebench R23. The Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 achieves a multi-core score of 39653, while the EPYC 73F3 reaches 39187, a 1.2% delta. In single-core R23, the scores are 5598 and 5532 respectively, maintaining the same 1.2% advantage for the Ryzen 9 PRO 7945. The data shows that the Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 is consistently faster, but the EPYC 73F3 is never far behind. The average benchmark score for the Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 is 11469, which places it 1.2% ahead of the EPYC 73F3’s average of 11334. Both processors sit at the 67th percentile of all CPUs, indicating they occupy a similar tier of overall performance.

Where Each One Wins

Based strictly on the benchmark results, the Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 is the victor in every measured category. It wins all six Cinebench tests, covering both single-core and multi-core workloads across three different renderer versions. This makes it the clear choice for any application that relies on raw CPU rendering performance, as measured by Cinebench. Its lead in single-core tests, though small, suggests better responsiveness in lightly-threaded tasks. The consistent 1.2-1.3% advantage across the board indicates a more efficient architecture that extracts more performance per clock.

The EPYC 73F3, despite losing every benchmark, has a clear structural advantage that is not reflected in these specific tests. It has 16 cores and 32 threads, which is 4 cores and 8 threads more than the Ryzen 9 PRO 7945. It also offers significantly more platform-level capability. The EPYC 73F3 supports eight-channel DDR4 memory with a bandwidth of 204.8 GB/s, compared to the dual-channel DDR5 with 83.2 GB/s on the Ryzen 9 PRO 7945. Furthermore, the EPYC 73F3 provides 128 PCIe Gen 4 lanes, versus 24 PCIe Gen 5 lanes on the Ryzen 9 PRO 7945. While the Cinebench tests show the Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 ahead, the EPYC 73F3’s massive I/O and memory bandwidth make it the superior platform for workloads involving large datasets, virtual machines, or high-speed networking that are not captured in these CPU-centric benchmarks.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear, if nuanced, verdict. For pure CPU compute performance as measured by Cinebench, the AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 is the winner. It outperforms the AMD EPYC 73F3 in every single test, from multi-core R15 to single-core R23. The margins are small, but they are consistent and absolute. Any user whose primary concern is the maximum Cinebench score should select the Ryzen 9 PRO 7945.

However, the EPYC 73F3 is the better choice for a different class of user. The data shows a 16-core processor with a 204.8 GB/s memory bandwidth and 128 PCIe Gen 4 lanes. These are platform-level features that the Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 cannot match. For a server workload that is memory-bandwidth-bound or I/O-bound, the EPYC 73F3’s architectural advantages would likely translate to real-world wins, even though the Cinebench tests do not capture them. The Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 wins the benchmark race; the EPYC 73F3 wins the platform race. The choice depends entirely on whether the workload is CPU-limited or system-limited.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher multi-core Cinebench R23 score?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 scores 39653, which is 1.2% higher than the AMD EPYC 73F3’s 39187.

Q: What is the single-core performance difference in Cinebench R20?

A: The Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 scores 2351, while the EPYC 73F3 scores 2323, giving the Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 a 1.2% advantage.

Q: How does the average benchmark score compare between the two?

A: The Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 has an average benchmark score of 11469, which is 1.2% higher than the EPYC 73F3’s 11334.

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD EPYC 73F3 has 16 cores and 32 threads, while the AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 has 12 cores and 24 threads.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The EPYC 73F3 supports eight-channel DDR4 with a bandwidth of 204.8 GB/s, which is substantially higher than the Ryzen 9 PRO 7945’s dual-channel DDR5 bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 has a boost clock of 5.40 GHz, while the EPYC 73F3 has a boost clock of 4.00 GHz.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on different architectures, nodes, and platforms. The AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 is based on the Zen 4 architecture, codenamed Raphael, and is fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. It uses 13,140 million transistors across a die size of 2x 71 mm². The AMD EPYC 73F3 is based on the older Zen 3 architecture, codenamed Milan, and uses a larger 7 nm process. This older process results in a significantly higher transistor count of 33,200 million, spread across a massive 8x 81 mm² die configuration.

The cache hierarchies also differ. The Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 has 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 1 MB of L2 cache per core, with 64 MB of shared L3 cache. The EPYC 73F3 matches the 64 KB L1 cache per core but has a smaller 512 KB of L2 cache per core. Its advantage lies in the L3 cache, which is a much larger 256 MB shared pool. This larger L3 cache is typical for server processors designed to handle large datasets.

Platform support is where the two diverge most sharply. The Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 uses the AMD Socket AM5 platform, supports dual-channel DDR5 memory with a bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s, and offers 24 PCIe Gen 5 lanes from the CPU. It also includes integrated Radeon Graphics. In contrast, the EPYC 73F3 uses the server-focused AMD Socket SP3 platform. It supports eight-channel DDR4 memory with a bandwidth of 204.8 GB/s and provides a massive 128 PCIe Gen 4 lanes. It has no integrated graphics. The TDP also reflects their different roles: the Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 is rated at 65 W, while the EPYC 73F3 is rated at 240 W. The EPYC 73F3 has a launch MSRP of $3521. Both processors support ECC memory, a critical feature for server reliability.