AMD EPYC 7473X vs AMD Ryzen 5 3501U Comparison

The AMD EPYC 7473X and AMD Ryzen 5 3501U occupy opposite ends of AMD’s product spectrum, yet both carry the same 69th percentile ranking among all CPUs in this database. That shared percentile is misleading, however, because the two processors are built for entirely different workloads, and their benchmark results reflect that divergence. The EPYC 7473X is a 24-core, 48-thread server powerhouse with a 240 W TDP, while the Ryzen 5 3501U is a 4-core, 4-thread mobile part with a 15 W TDP. The data shows a clear split: the EPYC dominates multi-core throughput and the Ryzen counters in specific single-threaded and latency-sensitive tests, though the overall score gap is surprisingly narrow given the hardware disparity.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark list is empty, meaning no direct comparative test results exist between these two processors. However, the individual benchmark suites provide enough data for a meaningful comparison. The EPYC 7473X’s Cinebench scores are its strongest evidence of superiority. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the EPYC scores 50,388, while the Ryzen 5 3501U has no equivalent Cinebench result—its benchmark suite is entirely Passmark-based. That absence is itself telling: the Ryzen’s data set focuses on different metrics, but the EPYC’s multi-core lead is unambiguous when compared to other server parts. The EPYC also posts 21,162 in Cinebench R20 multi-core and 5,078 in Cinebench R15 multi-core, numbers that dwarf any mobile processor’s capabilities.

On the single-core front, the EPYC 7473X scores 7,113 in Cinebench R23 single-core, 2,987 in Cinebench R20 single-core, and 716 in Cinebench R15 single-core. The Ryzen 5 3501U counters with a Passmark single-thread score of 2,136, which is a different metric entirely. The EPYC’s single-core Cinebench numbers are strong for a server chip, but the Ryzen’s Passmark score indicates it can hold its own in lightly threaded tasks despite having only 4 cores. The Ryzen’s Passmark multithread score of 7,071 is far below the EPYC’s multi-core scores, but that gap is expected given the 6x core-count difference.

The Ryzen 5 3501U’s Passmark results show specific strengths. Its data compression score of 87,380 is exceptional, suggesting the Zen+ architecture handles compression workloads efficiently relative to its core count. The integer math score of 26,321 and floating point math score of 12,707 are respectable for a 15 W part. The EPYC’s benchmark suite lacks these Passmark tests, so direct comparison is impossible, but the Ryzen’s numbers indicate it punches above its weight in certain algorithmic tasks. The Ryzen’s data encryption score of 5,580 and extended instructions score of 3,274 round out a profile that favors real-world mobile usage over peak throughput.

The average benchmark scores tell a fascinating story. The EPYC 7473X has an average benchmark score of 14,574, while the Ryzen 5 3501U averages 14,320. That difference of 254 points (approximately 1.8%) is remarkably small for a processor with 6 times the cores and 12 times the threads. The EPYC’s nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon 6315P with an identical average score of 14,574, and the AMD Ryzen 5 5500U at 14,589 (0.1% higher). The Ryzen 5 3501U’s nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen Embedded V2546 at 14,336 (0.1% higher) and the AMD Ryzen 3 7320C at 14,277 (0.3% lower). These rivalries suggest both processors sit in a crowded mid-range performance tier despite their different market segments.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two CPUs is generational and physical. The EPYC 7473X uses Zen 3 architecture on a 7 nm process from TSMC, while the Ryzen 5 3501U uses Zen+ architecture on a 12 nm process from GlobalFoundries. The EPYC’s codename is Milan-X, indicating it belongs to the EPYC 7003 series with 3D V-Cache technology implied by the X suffix. The Ryzen’s codename is Picasso, part of the 3000 series for mobile devices. The process node difference—7 nm versus 12 nm—explains why the EPYC packs 33,200 million transistors across an 8x 81 mm² die configuration, while the Ryzen manages 4,940 million transistors on a single 210 mm² die.

Cache configurations diverge dramatically. The EPYC 7473X provides 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and a massive 768 MB of shared L3 cache. That L3 figure is the headline feature, enabled by 3D stacking technology that gives the EPYC an enormous advantage in cache-sensitive workloads. The Ryzen 5 3501U offers 96 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and just 4 MB of shared L3 cache. The difference in L3 is 192x in the EPYC’s favor, which explains why the EPYC excels in multi-threaded server tasks that repeatedly access large datasets. The Ryzen’s larger per-core L1 (96 KB versus 64 KB) suggests a different optimization priority, favoring single-thread latency over massive shared pools.

Memory architecture reinforces the divide. The EPYC 7473X supports DDR4 memory across an eight-channel bus, yielding 204.8 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The Ryzen 5 3501U also supports DDR4 but on a dual-channel bus, delivering 38.4 GB/s. That 5.3x bandwidth advantage for the EPYC is critical for server workloads like database queries or virtualization. The EPYC also supports ECC memory, while the Ryzen does not, reflecting their respective server and mobile design goals. PCIe connectivity differs as well: the EPYC offers Gen 4 with 128 lanes (CPU only), while the Ryzen has Gen 3 without lane count specified. The EPYC’s integrated graphics are null, while the Ryzen includes Radeon Vega 8 graphics, a necessity for mobile systems without discrete GPUs.

The Verdict

The data points to a definitive split by workload type, not by overall capability. The EPYC 7473X is the clear choice for multi-threaded, memory-intensive server applications. Its 24 cores, 48 threads, and 768 MB of L3 cache are unmatched by the Ryzen, and its eight-channel memory bandwidth of 204.8 GB/s makes it suitable for enterprise workloads that the Ryzen cannot handle. The EPYC’s Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 50,388 is roughly 7 times higher than the Ryzen’s Passmark multithread score of 7,071, though the different test suites prevent a direct ratio. The EPYC’s 69th percentile ranking among all CPUs places it in the upper tier, and its nearest rival, the Intel Xeon 6315P, matches its average score exactly, indicating competitive parity with other server parts.

The Ryzen 5 3501U wins on efficiency and portability, not on raw compute. Its 15 W TDP versus the EPYC’s 240 W TDP means it can operate in thin-and-light laptops where the EPYC physically cannot fit. The Ryzen’s integrated Radeon Vega 8 graphics provide display output without a discrete GPU, and its Passmark data compression score of 87,380 suggests strong performance in file-handling tasks. The Ryzen’s average benchmark score of 14,320 is within 1.8% of the EPYC’s 14,574, which is remarkable given the core disparity. That narrow gap likely reflects the benchmark suite differences—the EPYC’s Cinebench scores are weighted differently than Passmark’s varied tests—but it also hints that the Ryzen’s single-thread efficiency is competitive.

Strictly from the data, the EPYC 7473X is for server racks and heavy parallel workloads, while the Ryzen 5 3501U is for mobile devices where power draw and physical size are paramount. Neither processor is a substitute for the other. The EPYC’s launch MSRP is $3900, a figure that signals its enterprise positioning. The Ryzen has no launch MSRP listed, but its market segment of Mobile and 15 W TDP make its role clear. The verdict is not about which is “better” but which fits the intended use case, and the data supports the EPYC for compute density and the Ryzen for energy-conscious mobility.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD EPYC 7473X | AMD Ryzen 5 3501U |

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

| Cores | 24 | 4 |

| Threads | 48 | 4 |

| Base Clock | 2.80 GHz | 2.10 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.70 GHz | 3.70 GHz |

| TDP | 240 W | 15 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket SP3 | AMD Socket FP5 |

| Architecture | Zen 3 | Zen+ |

| Codename | Milan-X | Picasso |

| Process Node | 7 nm | 12 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | GlobalFoundries |

| Transistors | 33,200 million | 4,940 million |

| Die Size | 8x 81 mm² | 210 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 64 KB (per core) | 96 KB (per core) |

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

| L3 Cache | 768 MB (shared) | 4 MB (shared) |

| Memory Bus | Eight-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 204.8 GB/s | 38.4 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 128 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 3 |

| Integrated Graphics | None | Radeon Vega 8 |

| Market Segment | Server/Workstation | Mobile |

| Release Date | 2022-03-21 | 2026-05-31 |

| Launch MSRP | $3900 | Not listed |

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD EPYC 7473X has 24 cores and 48 threads, while the AMD Ryzen 5 3501U has 4 cores and 4 threads.

Q: How does the L3 cache compare between the two?

A: The EPYC 7473X has 768 MB of shared L3 cache, which is 192 times larger than the Ryzen 5 3501U’s 4 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: What is the TDP difference, and why does it matter?

A: The EPYC 7473X has a TDP of 240 W, while the Ryzen 5 3501U has a TDP of 15 W. This 16x difference means the Ryzen is suitable for battery-powered mobile devices, while the EPYC requires robust server cooling.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory bandwidth?

A: No. The EPYC 7473X supports eight-channel DDR4 with 204.8 GB/s bandwidth, whereas the Ryzen 5 3501U supports dual-channel DDR4 with 38.4 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: The Ryzen 5 3501U includes Radeon Vega 8 integrated graphics, while the EPYC 7473X has no integrated graphics.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The EPYC 7473X has an average benchmark score of 14,574, and the Ryzen 5 3501U has an average score of 14,320, a difference of approximately 1.8%.

Where Each One Wins

The EPYC 7473X wins in every scenario that demands parallel processing power. Its 24 cores and 48 threads make it ideal for multi-threaded Cinebench workloads, as evidenced by its R23 multi-core score of 50,388. The 768 MB of L3 cache gives it an edge in workloads that repeatedly access large datasets, such as database indexing or virtualization hosts. The eight-channel memory bus with 204.8 GB/s bandwidth ensures data feeds the cores without bottleneck, and the 128 PCIe Gen 4 lanes support high-throughput peripherals like NVMe storage arrays or GPU accelerators. The EPYC’s ECC memory support adds reliability for long-running server processes where data corruption is unacceptable. Its market segment of Server/Workstation is confirmed by socket SP3 compatibility and a launch MSRP of $3900.

The Ryzen 5 3501U wins in mobile and efficiency-focused scenarios. Its 15 W TDP enables fanless or low-noise designs in laptops, where the EPYC’s 240 W TDP would be physically impossible to cool. The integrated Radeon Vega 8 graphics eliminate the need for a discrete GPU in basic display tasks, reducing system cost and complexity. The Ryzen’s Passmark results show specific wins: data compression at 87,380, integer math at 26,321, and floating point math at 12,707 all indicate solid performance for general productivity software. Its dual-channel memory with 38.4 GB/s is sufficient for typical mobile workloads like web browsing, document editing, and media playback. The socket FP5 platform is designed for thin-and-light chassis, and the 4 MB L3 cache is adequate for the Ryzen’s 4 cores. The Ryzen’s release date of 2026-05-31 suggests it is a newer design despite using older Zen+ architecture, potentially offering better platform integration than its age implies.

In short, the EPYC 7473X is the winner for compute-density-constrained server environments, and the Ryzen 5 3501U is the winner for power-constrained mobile devices. The data does not support using either in the other’s domain, and the 1.8% average score difference does not change that fundamental split.