AMD EPYC 7453 vs AMD EPYC 9224 Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD EPYC 7453 has 28 cores and 56 threads, while the AMD EPYC 9224 has 24 cores and 48 threads.

Q: What are the base and boost clock speeds of each chip?

A: The EPYC 7453 runs at 2.75 GHz base and 3.45 GHz boost. The EPYC 9224 runs at 2.50 GHz base and 3.70 GHz boost.

Q: Which CPU offers higher memory bandwidth?

A: The EPYC 9224 supports DDR5 memory with a twelve-channel bus and 460.8 GB/s bandwidth. The EPYC 7453 uses DDR4 with an eight-channel bus and 204.8 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The EPYC 7453 has an average benchmark score of 11912, placing it in the 67th percentile. The EPYC 9224 averages 11118, placing it in the 66th percentile.

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

A: The EPYC 7453 leads with 5814 points, versus 5426 points for the EPYC 9224, a 6.7% advantage.

Q: Are both CPUs still in production?

A: Yes, both the EPYC 9224 and the EPYC 7453 are listed as Active in production status.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent distinct generations of AMD's EPYC line, built on different process nodes and microarchitectures. The EPYC 9224 belongs to the EPYC 9004 series, codenamed Genoa, using Zen 4 architecture on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The EPYC 7453 belongs to the EPYC 7003 series, codenamed Milan, using Zen 3 architecture on a 7 nm process, also at TSMC.

Transistor counts differ substantially. The EPYC 9224 packs 26,280 million transistors across a die size of 4x 72 mm². The EPYC 7453 contains 16,600 million transistors across 4x 81 mm². The newer node allows the 9224 to fit more transistors in a smaller total die area, which contributes to its higher boost clock of 3.70 GHz compared to 3.45 GHz on the 7453, despite the 9224 having fewer cores.

Cache hierarchies show both similarities and differences. Both chips share 64 MB of L3 cache and 64 KB of L1 cache per core. The L2 cache differs: the EPYC 9224 has 1 MB per core, while the EPYC 7453 has 512 KB per core. This means the 9224 doubles per-core L2 capacity, which can benefit workloads with high per-thread data locality.

Memory support marks a major architectural split. The EPYC 9224 uses DDR5 with a twelve-channel memory bus, delivering 460.8 GB/s of bandwidth. The EPYC 7453 uses DDR4 with an eight-channel bus, delivering 204.8 GB/s. The 9224 more than doubles peak memory bandwidth, a critical factor for memory-bound server workloads.

PCIe generation also differs. The EPYC 9224 has PCIe Gen 5 with 128 lanes (CPU only), while the EPYC 7453 has PCIe Gen 4 with 128 lanes (CPU only). The sockets are incompatible: the 9224 uses AMD Socket SP5, and the 7453 uses AMD Socket SP3.

Power envelopes are close but not identical. The EPYC 9224 has a TDP of 200 W, and the EPYC 7453 has a TDP of 225 W. Both are fixed at 200 W and 225 W respectively, with no unlocked multiplier on either part.

The Verdict

The recorded data shows a clear, consistent winner in compute performance: the AMD EPYC 7453 wins all six head-to-head Cinebench benchmarks, and it does so by the same margin in every test. Its average benchmark score of 11912 is 6.7% higher than the EPYC 9224's 11118, and its 67th percentile ranking sits just above the 9224's 66th percentile.

For workloads that are purely about CPU throughput, particularly single-threaded and multi-threaded rendering tasks as measured by Cinebench, the EPYC 7453 is the stronger choice. It delivers higher scores despite being based on the older Zen 3 architecture and a larger 7 nm process node.

The EPYC 9224, however, is not without reason for selection. It offers a newer platform with DDR5 memory, a twelve-channel memory bus, PCIe Gen 5, and double the per-core L2 cache. It also draws 25 W less power. For workloads that depend heavily on memory bandwidth, storage bandwidth, or PCIe connectivity, the 9224's platform advantages may outweigh its lower compute scores.

The decision hinges on workload type. If the priority is raw CPU benchmark performance, choose the EPYC 7453. If the priority is platform modernity, memory bandwidth, and I/O capabilities, the EPYC 9224 provides those features, though the benchmark data does not directly measure those capabilities.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD EPYC 9224 | AMD EPYC 7453 |

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

| Series | EPYC 9004 series | EPYC 7003 series |

| Cores | 24 | 28 |

| Threads | 48 | 56 |

| Base Clock | 2.50 GHz | 2.75 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.70 GHz | 3.45 GHz |

| TDP | 200 W | 225 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket SP5 | AMD Socket SP3 |

| Architecture | Zen 4 | Zen 3 |

| Codename | Genoa | Milan |

| Process Node | 5 nm | 7 nm |

| Transistors | 26,280 million | 16,600 million |

| Die Size | 4x 72 mm² | 4x 81 mm² |

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

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

| Memory Support | DDR5 | DDR4 |

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

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

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

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

| Launch MSRP | $1825 | $1570 |

| Part Number | 100-100000939 | 100-000000319 |

Both processors share 64 KB of L1 cache per core, support ECC memory, have no integrated graphics, and target the Server/Workstation market segment.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data is unusually uniform: the EPYC 7453 wins every single test, and the margin is identical across all six benchmarks at 6.7%. This consistency indicates the performance gap is architectural and systemic rather than workload-specific.

In Cinebench R15 multicore, the EPYC 7453 scores 4151 against 3874 for the EPYC 9224, a 6.7% lead. The single-core R15 test shows the same pattern: 585 versus 546, again 6.7% in favor of the 7453.

Cinebench R20 follows the same trend. The multicore result is 17297 for the 7453 versus 16144 for the 9224, and the single-core result is 2441 versus 2278. Both deltas sit at 6.7%.

Cinebench R23, the most recent test in the set, repeats the pattern. The EPYC 7453 scores 41185 multicore versus 38439 for the 9224, and 5814 single-core versus 5426. The delta remains 6.7% in every case.

The EPYC 7453's higher base clock of 2.75 GHz, compared to 2.50 GHz on the 9224, likely contributes to its single-core wins. Its four additional cores (28 versus 24) explain part of the multicore advantage, though the consistent 6.7% margin across both single and multi-threaded tests suggests the clock speed and core count advantages combine to produce a uniform performance edge.

Notably, the EPYC 9224's higher boost clock of 3.70 GHz does not translate into a single-core win. The 7453's lower boost clock of 3.45 GHz still wins in single-threaded tests, indicating that sustained single-core performance favors the older chip in these measurements.

The nearest rival data places each chip in context. The EPYC 9224's closest competitor is the AMD EPYC 7542, which scores 11152 on average, a 0.3% difference. The EPYC 7453's closest rival is the Intel Core i7-7700, which scores 11914, a 0.0% difference. These comparisons show both chips are tightly grouped with their nearest competitors, though the 7453 sits at a higher absolute performance level.

Where Each One Wins

The EPYC 7453 wins in every measured compute benchmark. Its six wins out of six head-to-head tests make it the clear choice for CPU-bound workloads that resemble Cinebench rendering tasks. This includes multi-threaded rendering, video encoding, and other parallel compute workloads where the 7453's 28 cores and 56 threads provide a measurable edge. Its higher base clock of 2.75 GHz also makes it the better option for single-threaded responsiveness and lightly threaded workloads, as demonstrated by its wins in all three single-core Cinebench tests.

The EPYC 9224 wins in areas not directly captured by the Cinebench suite. Its DDR5 memory support with a twelve-channel bus provides 460.8 GB/s of bandwidth, more than double the 7453's 204.8 GB/s. For workloads that are memory-bandwidth sensitive, such as large in-memory databases, analytics, or high-performance computing applications that stream data, the 9224's memory subsystem is the decisive factor. Its PCIe Gen 5 support doubles the I/O bandwidth available for storage and accelerators compared to the 7453's PCIe Gen 4, making it the stronger platform for NVMe storage arrays and GPU clusters.

The 9224 also offers a more efficient per-core cache design with 1 MB of L2 per core versus 512 KB on the 7453. Workloads with high per-thread working sets may see fewer cache misses on the 9224, even though the 7453 wins in the measured Cinebench results. The 9224's lower TDP of 200 W versus 225 W also makes it the more power-efficient choice in dense server deployments, assuming the compute performance is sufficient.

The 7453 has the advantage in raw compute per dollar based on launch MSRP, but the database records show the 9224 launched at $1825 and the 7453 at $1570. For organizations standardizing on the newer SP5 platform with DDR5 and PCIe Gen 5, the 9224 provides forward-looking infrastructure, while the 7453 offers higher measured compute performance on the established SP3 platform with DDR4.

The verdict from the data is straightforward: the EPYC 7453 is the compute winner, and the EPYC 9224 is the platform winner. Choose the 7453 for maximum Cinebench-style performance, and choose the 9224 for memory bandwidth, I/O capabilities, and platform longevity.