AMD EPYC 7401P vs AMD EPYC 7451 Comparison

The AMD EPYC 7401P is the clear performance winner in this head-to-head, beating the AMD EPYC 7451 in every single benchmark recorded. Across six Cinebench tests, the 7401P consistently delivers roughly 13.5% higher scores, making it the superior choice for raw compute workloads despite both chips sharing the same core count and architecture. The 7451, however, is not without merit, as it holds a slight edge in average benchmark scores when compared to its rival’s own nearest-rival list, though this does not translate into a direct win in any head-to-head test.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The data is unambiguous: the AMD EPYC 7401P wins all six head-to-head comparisons. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the 7401P scores 2384 against the 7451’s 2061, a delta of -13.5% from the 7451’s perspective. The single-core R15 test shows a similar gap, with the 7401P at 336 and the 7451 at 290, a -13.7% difference. This pattern holds across newer Cinebench versions. In R20 multicore, the 7401P posts 9937 versus 8589, and in R20 single-core it posts 1402 versus 1212, both showing a -13.6% delta. The R23 results continue the trend: multicore 23660 for the 7401P against 20450 for the 7451, and single-core 3340 against 2887, again with a -13.6% gap.

The consistency of these deltas is striking. Every benchmark, regardless of workload type or Cinebench generation, lands within a narrow band of -13.5% to -13.7%. This suggests a systematic performance advantage for the 7401P, likely tied to its clock speeds, rather than a workload-specific quirk. The 7451’s best showing is still a loss, and it never comes within single digits of the 7401P. For context, the 7451’s average benchmark score is 5915, while the 7401P’s is 5814, meaning the 7451 actually scores higher on average across all recorded tests, but this average includes a broader set of benchmarks than just the head-to-head Cinebench suite.

The 7401P also appears on the 7451’s nearest rivals list with a deltaPct of 1.7, indicating the 7451 is 1.7% ahead of the 7401P in average score. Conversely, the 7401P’s nearest rivals list shows the 7451 with a deltaPct of -1.7, meaning the 7401P trails the 7451 by that same margin in average score. This creates an interesting paradox: the 7451 wins on aggregate average, but loses decisively on every direct comparison. The practical takeaway is that for Cinebench-specific workloads, the 7401P is the faster chip, while the 7451’s average score advantage is driven by other tests not included in the head-to-head set.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has the higher boost clock?

A: The AMD EPYC 7451 has a boost clock of 3.20 GHz, while the AMD EPYC 7401P has a boost clock of 3.00 GHz. Despite this, the 7401P wins all head-to-head benchmarks, indicating other factors dominate performance.

Q: Do both CPUs have the same number of cores and threads?

A: Yes, both the AMD EPYC 7451 and the AMD EPYC 7401P have 24 cores and 48 threads.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth for each CPU?

A: Both CPUs feature an eight-channel memory bus with a memory bandwidth of 170.6 GB/s, and both support DDR4 memory with ECC.

Q: Are there any benchmarks where the AMD EPYC 7451 wins?

A: No. The head-to-head benchmark data shows the AMD EPYC 7401P winning all six Cinebench tests, with the 7451 recording zero wins.

Q: How do these CPUs compare in average benchmark score?

A: The AMD EPYC 7451 has an average benchmark score of 5915, which is 1.7% higher than the AMD EPYC 7401P’s average score of 5814, according to the nearest rivals data.

Q: What is the release date for both CPUs?

A: Both the AMD EPYC 7451 and the AMD EPYC 7401P were released on 2017-06-28.

Architecture Differences

Both CPUs are built on the same fundamental architecture, which makes their performance gap particularly notable. They share the Zen microarchitecture with the Naples codename, belong to the EPYC 7001 series, and are fabricated on a 14 nm process node by GlobalFoundries. The transistor count is identical at 4,800 million, and the die size is the same at 213 mm². Both use the AMD Socket SP3 and support PCIe Gen 3. The cache hierarchy is also identical: 96 KB of L1 cache per core, 512 KB of L2 cache per core, and a shared 64 MB of L3 cache.

The key architectural difference lies in clock speeds. The AMD EPYC 7451 has a base clock of 2.30 GHz and a boost clock of 3.20 GHz. The AMD EPYC 7401P has a base clock of 2000.00 MHz (equivalent to 2.00 GHz) and a boost clock of 3.00 GHz. This means the 7451 has higher clocks on paper, yet it loses in every benchmark. The 7401P’s lower base clock and boost clock should theoretically put it at a disadvantage, but the benchmark results show the opposite, suggesting that the 7401P’s power management or thermal characteristics allow it to sustain higher effective performance in Cinebench workloads. Both CPUs have a TDP of 180 W for the 7451 and 170 W for the 7401P, with the 7401P drawing slightly less power. Both are unlocked (multiplierUnlocked: true) and have integrated graphics set to null, meaning neither has an iGPU.

The Verdict

The data points to a decisive recommendation: choose the AMD EPYC 7401P if your priority is raw Cinebench performance. It wins every single head-to-head test, with a consistent margin of approximately 13.5% across all six benchmarks. This is not a marginal victory; it is a systematic advantage that will translate into faster rendering and compute times in applications that scale similarly to Cinebench. The 7401P’s average benchmark score of 5814 is lower than the 7451’s 5915, but this average includes tests outside the head-to-head set, and for the specific workloads measured, the 7401P is superior.

The AMD EPYC 7451, by contrast, offers no head-to-head wins. Its higher base and boost clocks (2.30 GHz and 3.20 GHz versus 2.00 GHz and 3.00 GHz) do not result in any performance benefit in the recorded benchmarks. Its average score advantage of 1.7% over the 7401P comes from a broader benchmark suite, but within the Cinebench tests that form the direct comparison, it is consistently slower. The 7451 also has a higher TDP of 180 W versus the 7401P’s 170 W, meaning it consumes more power while delivering less performance in these tests.

For a server or workstation workload where Cinebench-style rendering is representative, the 7401P is the clear pick. The 7451 only makes sense if your specific applications align with the tests that boost its average score, but the head-to-head data provides no evidence for such an advantage. Both CPUs share the same core count, threads, cache, memory bandwidth, and socket, so the decision comes down to the benchmark results, which favor the 7401P overwhelmingly.

Specification Differences

The two CPUs differ in only a few specification fields, and the benchmark results are not predicted by these differences. The base clock is the most obvious divergence: the AMD EPYC 7451 runs at 2.30 GHz, while the AMD EPYC 7401P runs at 2000.00 MHz (2.00 GHz). The boost clock also differs, with the 7451 at 3.20 GHz and the 7401P at 3.00 GHz. The TDP is another point of distinction: the 7451 has a TDP of 180 W, while the 7401P has a TDP of 170 W. The part numbers are also different: the 7451 is PS7451BDVHCAF, and the 7401P is PS740PBEVHCAF.

All other specification fields are identical. Both have 24 cores, 48 threads, an L1 cache of 96 KB per core, an L2 cache of 512 KB per core, and a shared L3 cache of 64 MB. Both use AMD Socket SP3, support DDR4 memory with an eight-channel bus and 170.6 GB/s bandwidth, and have ECC memory support. They share the same 14 nm process node, 4,800 million transistors, and 213 mm² die size. Both are unlocked, have no integrated graphics, and belong to the EPYC 7001 series with the Naples codename and Zen architecture.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD EPYC 7401P wins in every measurable head-to-head category. It dominates all six Cinebench tests, including both multicore and single-core variants across R15, R20, and R23. This makes it the better choice for any workload that relies on sustained CPU compute, such as 3D rendering, video encoding, or scientific simulation, where the consistent 13.5% performance advantage will reduce processing times. The 7401P also has a lower TDP of 170 W versus 180 W, meaning it achieves this higher performance while consuming less power, which is an efficiency win for dense server deployments.

The AMD EPYC 7451 has no head-to-head wins, but it does hold an advantage in average benchmark score. Its average score of 5915 is 1.7% higher than the 7401P’s 5814, per the nearest rivals data. This suggests that in tests outside the Cinebench suite, the 7451 may perform better, but the FACT PACK does not specify which tests contribute to this average. For a user running a mixed workload that includes non-Cinebench applications, the 7451’s higher average score could be relevant. Additionally, the 7451 has higher base and boost clocks, which could theoretically benefit single-threaded tasks that are not latency-sensitive, though the single-core Cinebench results contradict this expectation.

In summary, the 7401P is the winner for Cinebench-style compute, offering faster performance at lower power. The 7451 is only preferable if the unspecified tests behind its higher average score are critical to your use case, but the documented head-to-head data offers no support for choosing it.