CPU Comparison

The AMD EPYC 7501 and AMD EPYC 7451 are both 14nm Naples-generation server processors built on the Zen architecture for the AMD Socket SP3 platform. Both are active in the EPYC 7001 series, share identical cache structures, and target the same server and workstation market segment. The data shows a clear performance hierarchy between the two, with the EPYC 7501 holding a consistent edge across every benchmark recorded, though the margins are narrower than the core count difference might suggest. This analysis walks through the benchmark results, architectural similarities, and specification differences to determine where each processor fits.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark suite covers six Cinebench tests, spanning single-core and multi-core workloads across three generations of the rendering benchmark. The EPYC 7501 wins all six matchups, but the victory margins are remarkably uniform. In the multi-core tests, the EPYC 7501 scores 2135 against 2061 in Cinebench R15, a 3.6% lead. That same 3.6% delta repeats in Cinebench R20 (8898 vs 8589) and Cinebench R23 (21186 vs 20450). The consistency of that 3.6% margin across all three multi-core tests indicates a stable, predictable performance advantage that scales uniformly with workload intensity.

The single-core results tell a slightly different story. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the EPYC 7501 scores 301 versus 290 for the EPYC 7451, which translates to a 3.8% advantage. Cinebench R20 single-core shows the EPYC 7501 at 1256 and the EPYC 7451 at 1212, again a 3.6% gap. The Cinebench R23 single-core test has the EPYC 7501 at 2991 and the EPYC 7451 at 2887, maintaining that 3.6% delta. The R15 single-core margin of 3.8% is the largest single win for the EPYC 7501 in the entire comparison, though it is only marginally above the 3.6% figure seen elsewhere. The data indicates that the EPYC 7501's advantage is not concentrated in any particular workload type; it is a broad, consistent lead across both single-threaded and multi-threaded rendering tasks.

Looking at the broader competitive landscape, the EPYC 7501's average benchmark score is 6128, placing it in the 61st percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rival is the Intel Core i9-7940X, which scores 6147 and is 0.3% ahead, a negligible margin. The AMD EPYC 7272 sits 0.9% behind at 6186, and the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1950X trails by 1.7% with a score of 6231. The EPYC 7451, meanwhile, averages 5915, also in the 61st percentile. Its closest competitor is the Intel Core i9-9920X, which matches it exactly with a 0% delta and a score of 5917. The Intel Xeon W-2170B is 1.2% behind, while the AMD EPYC 7401P is 1.7% ahead and the Intel Xeon E-2388G is 1.9% ahead. Both EPYC parts sit in the same percentile band, but the EPYC 7501's average score is 213 points higher.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the AMD EPYC 7501 is the faster processor in every measured benchmark. Across all six Cinebench tests, it wins with a delta of either 3.6% or 3.8%. For workloads that rely on Cinebench rendering performance, the EPYC 7501 is the superior choice. The 32-core configuration provides 32 cores and 64 threads, compared to the EPYC 7451's 24 cores and 48 threads. Despite having 33% more cores, the EPYC 7501 only achieves roughly 3.6% higher multi-core scores. This suggests that the performance scaling is limited by factors other than raw core count, likely memory bandwidth or cache contention, both of which are identical between the two parts (170.6 GB/s memory bandwidth and 64 MB shared L3 cache).

The EPYC 7451 is not without merit. It offers a higher base clock of 2.30 GHz versus 2.00 GHz, and a higher boost clock of 3.20 GHz versus 3.00 GHz. Yet in single-core benchmarks, the EPYC 7501 still wins by 3.6% to 3.8%. This is counterintuitive given the clock speed disadvantage, but the data shows the EPYC 7501's single-core scores (301, 1256, 2991) consistently outpace the EPYC 7451's (290, 1212, 2887). The EPYC 7501 also has a lower TDP of 170 watts compared to 180 watts for the EPYC 7451, meaning it delivers more performance while consuming less power.

For buyers choosing between these two, the decision hinges on whether the consistent 3.6% performance uplift justifies the additional 8 cores and 16 threads. The EPYC 7501 also holds a slight advantage in the nearestRivals comparison, with an average score of 6128 that places it just 0.3% behind the Intel Core i9-7940X, whereas the EPYC 7451's 5915 average puts it exactly level with the Intel Core i9-9920X. The EPYC 7501 is the pick for maximum performance; the EPYC 7451 is the pick when the slightly lower core count is acceptable for the workload.

Architecture Differences

Both processors share the same fundamental architecture: Zen, codenamed Naples, built on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. Both use the same 4,800 million transistor count and a 213 mm² die size. The memory architecture is identical, with DDR4 support, an eight-channel memory bus, and 170.6 GB/s of memory bandwidth. Both support ECC memory and PCIe Gen 3. The cache hierarchy is also identical: 96 KB of L1 cache per core, 512 KB of L2 cache per core, and 64 MB of shared L3 cache.

The only architectural difference lies in the core configuration. The EPYC 7501 has 32 cores and 64 threads, while the EPYC 7451 has 24 cores and 48 threads. This difference in core count is the sole architectural differentiator listed in the data, aside from the clock speeds. Both are unlocked multipliers and use the same AMD Socket SP3. The release date is the same for both, 2017-06-28, and both are marked as active in production. The generation field lists both as "EPYC (Zen (Naples))", confirming they belong to the same family. The part numbers differ (PS7501BEVIHAF for the EPYC 7501, PS7451BDVHCAF for the EPYC 7451), but this is a minor identifier rather than a functional difference.

Given the identical process node, foundry, transistor count, die size, memory support, and cache structure, the performance gap between these two processors must stem entirely from the core count and clock speed configuration. The EPYC 7501 leverages two additional core clusters to achieve higher multi-core throughput, while the EPYC 7451 compensates with higher base and boost clocks. The benchmark results show that the EPYC 7501's core advantage outweighs the EPYC 7451's clock advantage in all tests.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in exactly four specification fields: cores, threads, base clock, and boost clock, plus TDP. The EPYC 7501 has 32 cores and 64 threads, while the EPYC 7451 has 24 cores and 48 threads. The base clock is 2.00 GHz for the EPYC 7501 and 2.30 GHz for the EPYC 7451, a difference of 0.30 GHz in favor of the EPYC 7451. The boost clock is 3.00 GHz for the EPYC 7501 and 3.20 GHz for the EPYC 7451, again favoring the EPYC 7451 by 0.20 GHz. The TDP is 170 watts for the EPYC 7501 and 180 watts for the EPYC 7451, meaning the EPYC 7501 is the more power-efficient part despite having more cores.

All other specifications are identical: both use AMD Socket SP3, Zen architecture, Naples codename, 14 nm process, GlobalFoundries foundry, 4,800 million transistors, 213 mm² die size, 96 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, 64 MB shared L3, DDR4 memory, eight-channel memory bus, 170.6 GB/s memory bandwidth, ECC memory support, PCIe Gen 3, no integrated graphics, server/workstation market segment, active production status, same release date, and unlocked multiplier. There is no launch MSRP listed for either part, so no pricing information is available.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD EPYC 7501 has 32 cores and 64 threads, while the AMD EPYC 7451 has 24 cores and 48 threads. This gives the EPYC 7501 a 33% core count advantage.

Q: Which processor has the higher clock speed?

A: The AMD EPYC 7451 has the higher clocks, with a base clock of 2.30 GHz and a boost clock of 3.20 GHz. The AMD EPYC 7501 runs at 2.00 GHz base and 3.00 GHz boost.

Q: What is the performance difference in multi-core Cinebench R23?

A: The EPYC 7501 scores 21186 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, while the EPYC 7451 scores 20450. This represents a 3.6% advantage for the EPYC 7501.

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

A: No. In the six head-to-head benchmarks recorded, the EPYC 7501 wins all six. The EPYC 7451 records zero wins.

Q: How do these processors compare to their nearest rivals?

A: The EPYC 7501 has an average benchmark score of 6128, sitting 0.3% behind the Intel Core i9-7940X. The EPYC 7451 averages 5915, exactly matching the Intel Core i9-9920X with a 0% delta.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory and socket?

A: Yes. Both use AMD Socket SP3, support DDR4 memory with an eight-channel bus, and offer 170.6 GB/s of memory bandwidth with ECC support.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD EPYC 7501 wins in all six Cinebench benchmarks, covering both single-core and multi-core workloads across R15, R20, and R23 versions. Its multi-core scores, 2135, 8898, and 21186, are each 3.6% higher than the EPYC 7451's corresponding scores of 2061, 8589, and 20450. Its single-core scores, 301, 1256, and 2991, are 3.8% higher in R15 and 3.6% higher in R20 and R23 than the EPYC 7451's 290, 1212, and 2887. The EPYC 7501 also wins on power efficiency, with a TDP of 170 watts compared to 180 watts for the EPYC 7451.

The AMD EPYC 7451 does not win any benchmark, but it has advantages in clock speed. The higher base clock of 2.30 GHz and boost clock of 3.20 GHz are specification wins, even if they do not translate to benchmark victories. In a scenario where the workload is extremely sensitive to per-core clock speed, the EPYC 7451's higher clocks could theoretically be preferable, but the data shows the EPYC 7501 still outperforms it in single-core tests. The EPYC 7451 also has a lower core count, which may be simpler to license in software that charges per core, though this is not a performance consideration. For any Cinebench-based workload, the EPYC 7501 is the clear winner; the EPYC 7451's appeal rests solely on its clock speed specifications and lower core count.