AMD EPYC 7452 vs AMD EPYC 7D12 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a completely one-sided comparison. The AMD EPYC 7452 wins all six head-to-head Cinebench tests against the AMD EPYC 7D12, with a consistent delta of 6.9% across every workload. This uniformity is remarkable: whether the test is single-threaded or multi-threaded, the margin never varies.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the EPYC 7452 scores 3930 against the EPYC 7D12's 3675. The 6.9% advantage translates to 255 points. The single-core R15 result follows the same pattern: 554 versus 518, again a 6.9% gap. Moving to Cinebench R20, the multi-core score of 16377 for the EPYC 7452 eclipses the 15315 of the EPYC 7D12, a difference of 1062 points. The single-core R20 test shows 2312 against 2162.

The newest test generation, Cinebench R23, reinforces the trend. The EPYC 7452 posts 38993 in multi-core, while the EPYC 7D12 manages 36465, a gap of 2528 points. In single-core R23, the scores are 5505 and 5148 respectively. Every single test records the same 6.9% delta, which suggests the performance difference is structural rather than workload-dependent.

The average benchmark scores in the database tell a broader story. The EPYC 7452 has an average score of 11279 across all recorded benchmarks, placing it at the 66th percentile of all CPUs. The EPYC 7D12 averages 10547, also at the 66th percentile, but with a lower absolute figure. The nearest rivals for the EPYC 7452 include the Intel Core i5-1145G7 with an identical average score of 11279 (0% delta), the AMD EPYC 7402 at 11312 (-0.3%), the AMD EPYC 73F3 at 11334 (-0.5%), and the Intel Core i3-1305U at 11200 (0.7%). For the EPYC 7D12, the nearest rivals are the Intel Core i7-4790 at 10556 (-0.1%), the AMD EPYC 7502P at 10512 (0.3%), the Intel Xeon W-3175X at 10369 (1.7%), and the Intel Xeon Gold 6338N at 10347 (1.9%).

These rival comparisons show that the EPYC 7452 sits in a slightly higher performance tier. Its average score of 11279 exceeds the EPYC 7D12's 10547 by approximately 6.9%, which matches the head-to-head delta exactly. The EPYC 7452 competes with the EPYC 7402 and EPYC 73F3, while the EPYC 7D12 lines up against lower-scoring Xeon and older Core processors.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear hierarchy. The AMD EPYC 7452 is the faster processor in every recorded benchmark, and the margin is consistent at 6.9% across all Cinebench versions and thread counts. There is no scenario in the database where the EPYC 7D12 takes a win.

For workloads that prioritize raw Cinebench performance, the EPYC 7452 is the straightforward choice. Its multi-core scores are higher by 255 to 2528 points depending on the test version, and its single-core scores lead by 36 to 357 points. The 6.9% advantage is uniform, so there is no workload where the EPYC 7D12 closes the gap.

The EPYC 7D12 does have one clear advantage in the specification data: its TDP is 85 watts versus 155 watts for the EPYC 7452. That is a substantial power reduction. The EPYC 7D12's base clock is recorded as 1100.00, which is far lower than the EPYC 7452's 2.20 base clock, and its boost clock is 3.00 versus 3.35. The lower power envelope and reduced clocks make the EPYC 7D12 the more power-conscious option, though the database does not include power consumption measurements to confirm real-world efficiency.

The verdict depends on the priority. If performance is the sole criterion, the EPYC 7452 wins every test. If power draw is the limiting factor, the EPYC 7D12 offers an 85-watt TDP solution with 32 cores and 64 threads, making it viable for dense deployments where thermal and power budgets are tight. The percentile ranking is identical at 66, so both chips sit in the same tier relative to all CPUs, but the EPYC 7452 occupies the higher absolute position within that tier.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU wins more benchmarks in the head-to-head comparison?

A: The AMD EPYC 7452 wins all 6 recorded head-to-head Cinebench tests. The AMD EPYC 7D12 wins 0.

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

A: The EPYC 7452 scores 38993, while the EPYC 7D12 scores 36465. The delta is 6.9% in favor of the EPYC 7452.

Q: How do the average benchmark scores compare?

A: The EPYC 7452 has an average benchmark score of 11279, while the EPYC 7D12 averages 10547. Both sit at the 66th percentile of all CPUs.

Q: Do both CPUs have the same core and thread count?

A: Yes, both have 32 cores and 64 threads.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two processors?

A: The EPYC 7452 has a TDP of 155 watts, while the EPYC 7D12 has a TDP of 85 watts.

Q: Are the single-core scores also in favor of the EPYC 7452?

A: Yes, the EPYC 7452 leads in every single-core test. In Cinebench R23 single-core, it scores 5505 versus 5148 for the EPYC 7D12, a 6.9% advantage.

Specification Differences

The two processors share many core specifications but differ in several key fields. Both use the AMD Socket SP3, the Zen 2 architecture, and the Rome codename. Both are manufactured on a 7 nm process at TSMC, support DDR4 memory with an eight-channel memory bus, and have a memory bandwidth of 204.8 GB/s. Both support ECC memory and are unlocked multipliers are not available on either.

The differences begin with clock speeds. The EPYC 7452 has a base clock of 2.20 GHz and a boost clock of 3.35 GHz. The EPYC 7D12 has a base clock recorded as 1100.00, which is an unusual figure, and a boost clock of 3.00 GHz. The TDP differs substantially: 155 watts for the EPYC 7452 versus 85 watts for the EPYC 7D12.

Cache configurations also diverge. The EPYC 7452 lists 96 KB of L1 cache per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 128 MB of shared L3 cache. The EPYC 7D12 lists 64 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 32 MB of L3 per die with a total L3 of 128 MB. The EPYC 7452 does not specify a per-die L3 figure. The transistor counts differ as well: the EPYC 7452 has 3,800 million transistors on a 74 mm² die, while the EPYC 7D12 has 15,200 million transistors across a 4x 74 mm² die configuration.

PCIe support shows a distinction. The EPYC 7452 supports PCIe Gen 4, while the EPYC 7D12 supports PCIe Gen 4 with 128 lanes (CPU only). The release dates are different: the EPYC 7452 was released on August 6, 2019, and the EPYC 7D12 on April 13, 2020. The part numbers differ: 100-000000057 for the EPYC 7452 and 100-000000044 for the EPYC 7D12. Neither has a launch MSRP in the database.

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on the Zen 2 architecture and carry the Rome codename, so the fundamental microarchitecture is identical. The manufacturing process is the same 7 nm node from TSMC. The core counts match at 32 cores and 64 threads, and both use the SP3 socket.

The architectural differences appear in the cache hierarchy and die layout. The EPYC 7452 has 96 KB of L1 cache per core, while the EPYC 7D12 has 64 KB per core. L2 cache is identical at 512 KB per core. L3 cache is organized differently: the EPYC 7452 has 128 MB shared, while the EPYC 7D12 has 32 MB per die with a total of 128 MB. This indicates a different die arrangement, and the transistor counts confirm it. The EPYC 7452 uses 3,800 million transistors on a single 74 mm² die, while the EPYC 7D12 uses 15,200 million transistors across 4x 74 mm² dies.

The clock architecture differs significantly. The EPYC 7452 has a base clock of 2.20 GHz and a boost of 3.35 GHz. The EPYC 7D12 has a base clock of 1100.00 (the database records this unusual value) and a boost of 3.00 GHz. The base clock difference is large, which explains the TDP gap. The EPYC 7D12's 85-watt TDP is achieved through a much lower base clock, while the EPYC 7452 uses 155 watts to sustain a higher base frequency.

PCIe capabilities differ slightly. The EPYC 7452 lists PCIe Gen 4 without a lane count, while the EPYC 7D12 lists PCIe Gen 4 with 128 lanes (CPU only). Both support DDR4 memory with eight channels and 204.8 GB/s bandwidth, and both support ECC.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark results give the EPYC 7452 a clean sweep. It wins all six Cinebench tests, including multi-core and single-core variants of R15, R20, and R23. The consistent 6.9% delta means the EPYC 7452 is preferable for any workload that is represented by these Cinebench scores. That includes threaded rendering, simulation, and general compute tasks where multi-core performance matters, as well as lightly threaded tasks where single-core performance dominates. The EPYC 7452's higher boost clock of 3.35 GHz versus 3.00 GHz supports its single-core advantage, and its higher base clock of 2.20 GHz versus 1100.00 supports sustained multi-core throughput.

The EPYC 7D12 has no benchmark wins in the database, but it has a clear specification-led advantage: power consumption. Its 85-watt TDP is 70 watts lower than the EPYC 7452's 155-watt TDP. For server deployments where power density is a constraint, the EPYC 7D12 offers 32 cores and 64 threads in a lower-power envelope. The database does not include power efficiency metrics, so the exact performance-per-watt cannot be quantified, but the TDP figures alone indicate the EPYC 7D12 is the more power-conscious option.

The EPYC 7D12 also has a later release date of April 13, 2020, versus August 6, 2019, for the EPYC 7452. The PCIe lane count is explicitly higher at 128 lanes (CPU only) for the EPYC 7D12, which could matter for I/O-heavy workloads, though the EPYC 7452 lists PCIe Gen 4 without a lane count. The transistor count is higher for the EPYC 7D12 at 15,200 million versus 3,800 million, but this is spread across four dies rather than one.

In practical terms, the EPYC 7452 is the choice for maximum Cinebench performance. The EPYC 7D12 is the choice for lower-power deployments where the 6.9% performance deficit is an acceptable trade for a 45% reduction in TDP. Both CPUs occupy the same 66th percentile, so they serve the same market segment, but the EPYC 7452 is the higher-performing sibling within that segment.