AMD EPYC 7501 vs AMD EPYC 7551 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data for the AMD EPYC 7551 and AMD EPYC 7501 shows a remarkably consistent pattern across the entire Cinebench suite. The EPYC 7551 wins all six recorded head-to-head comparisons, with the same 4.3% advantage appearing in five of the six tests. Only the Cinebench R20 single-core test deviates slightly, with the EPYC 7551 ahead by 4.2%.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the EPYC 7551 scores 2227 against 2135 for the EPYC 7501. That 4.3% gap is substantial for two processors that share identical core counts, thread counts, and clock specifications. The single-core R15 result tells the same story, 314 versus 301, again a 4.3% edge for the EPYC 7551.

Moving to Cinebench R20, the EPYC 7551 posts 9280 in multi-core while the EPYC 7501 manages 8898. The delta remains at 4.3%. In single-core R20, the EPYC 7551 scores 1309 against 1256, a 4.2% margin. The consistency of these deltas across both single-threaded and heavily threaded workloads suggests the performance difference is systematic rather than workload-specific.

Cinebench R23 confirms the pattern. Multi-core results show 22096 for the EPYC 7551 versus 21186 for the EPYC 7501, and single-core results show 3119 versus 2991. Both deltas sit at exactly 4.3%. The EPYC 7551 leads by the same percentage in every generation of Cinebench, which points to a fixed architectural or configuration advantage rather than a scaling effect tied to thread count.

The average benchmark score reinforces this picture. The EPYC 7551 averages 6391 across all recorded tests, while the EPYC 7501 averages 6128. That is a 4.3% difference in average score, matching the per-test deltas almost exactly. The EPYC 7551 also ranks in the 62nd percentile among all CPUs in the database, one point higher than the EPYC 7501's 61st percentile.

The nearest rivals for each chip show how close the broader competitive field is. The EPYC 7551 sits within 0.7% of the Intel Core i9-10920X, which averages 6347, and trails the Intel Core i7-12800HE by 1.2% and the Intel Xeon D-2796TE by 1.8%. The EPYC 7501's nearest rival list includes the Intel Core i9-7940X at only 0.3% behind, the AMD EPYC 7272 at 0.9% behind, and the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1950X at 1.7% behind. Both AMD parts are positioned in a dense cluster of competing server and workstation processors, but the EPYC 7551 consistently finishes above its sibling.

Where Each One Wins

The EPYC 7551 wins every recorded benchmark, so the use-case split is not about one chip beating the other in specific tasks. Instead, the question is where the 4.3% advantage matters most.

For multi-threaded rendering workloads, the EPYC 7551's lead is worth noting. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the gap is 910 points, and in R20 multi-core it is 382 points. These are workloads that scale across all 32 cores and 64 threads, so the difference appears in full. The EPYC 7551 is the stronger choice for sustained rendering, video encoding, and other heavily parallel jobs.

For single-threaded tasks, the advantage is smaller in absolute terms but still present. The EPYC 7551 leads by 13 points in R15 single-core, 53 points in R20 single-core, and 128 points in R23 single-core. Applications that rely on one or two threads, such as older software or lightly threaded simulation tools, will see a modest but consistent benefit from the EPYC 7551.

The EPYC 7501 remains a capable part in its own right. Its 21186 score in Cinebench R23 multi-core is within 4.3% of the EPYC 7551's result, and its 2991 single-core score is close as well. For deployments where the small performance difference is acceptable, the EPYC 7501 still delivers the same 32-core, 64-thread configuration with identical memory bandwidth and cache specifications. The database shows no benchmark category where the EPYC 7501 pulls ahead.

The percentile rankings place both chips in the same general performance tier, with the EPYC 7551 at 62 and the EPYC 7501 at 61. That one-point difference reflects the narrow but real separation between the two. In a fleet of identical servers, the EPYC 7551 would complete render jobs measurably faster, but the EPYC 7501 would not create a bottleneck in most mixed workloads.

Architecture Differences

The two processors share nearly their entire architectural foundation. Both use the Zen architecture, codenamed Naples, and both belong to the EPYC 7001 series. The process node is 14 nm at GlobalFoundries for both chips. Die size is identical at 213 mm², and the transistor count is the same at 4,800 million.

Core and thread counts match exactly: 32 cores and 64 threads on each. Base clocks are both 2000.00 MHz, and boost clocks are both 3.00 GHz. The cache hierarchy is identical, with 96 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 64 MB of shared L3. Memory support is DDR4 over an eight-channel bus, with a memory bandwidth of 170.6 GB/s for both. ECC memory is supported on both parts. PCIe is Gen 3 for both, and both use the AMD Socket SP3.

The only specification difference in the entire data set is thermal design power. The EPYC 7551 carries a TDP of 180 watts, while the EPYC 7501 is rated at 170 watts. That 10-watt gap likely explains the consistent 4.3% performance delta. The EPYC 7551 appears to be configured with a slightly higher power envelope, allowing the silicon to sustain higher clocks under load, despite identical nominal boost specifications.

Both chips share the same part family design approach, with the multiplier unlocked on each. The production status is Active for both, and both were released on the same date. The part numbers differ, PS7551BDVIHAF for the EPYC 7551 and PS7501BEVIHAF for the EPYC 7501, which is the expected distinction between two SKUs in the same product generation.

The architecture differences section is therefore brief but meaningful. There is no node advantage, no core count advantage, no cache advantage, and no memory bandwidth advantage for either chip. The entire competitive difference reduces to the power envelope and whatever binning or configuration choices AMD made when separating these two SKUs.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: Neither. Both the AMD EPYC 7551 and the AMD EPYC 7501 have 32 cores and 64 threads.

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

A: The EPYC 7551 leads by 4.3% in Cinebench R23 multi-core, scoring 22096 against 21186. The same 4.3% margin appears in Cinebench R15 multi-core (2227 versus 2135) and Cinebench R20 multi-core (9280 versus 8898).

Q: Is the single-core performance gap the same as multi-core?

A: Yes, nearly identical. The EPYC 7551 leads by 4.3% in Cinebench R15 and R23 single-core, and by 4.2% in Cinebench R20 single-core.

Q: Do the two processors have the same architecture?

A: Yes. Both use the Zen architecture with the Naples codename, built on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. Die size, transistor count, cache layout, memory support, and PCIe generation are all identical.

Q: What is the only specification that differs between them?

A: Thermal design power. The EPYC 7551 has a TDP of 180 watts, while the EPYC 7501 has a TDP of 170 watts. All other recorded specifications, including base clock, boost clock, cores, threads, cache, and memory, are the same.

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

A: The EPYC 7551 averages 6391 in benchmark scores, within 0.7% of the Intel Core i9-10920X and 1.2% behind the Intel Core i7-12800HE. The EPYC 7501 averages 6128, sitting 0.3% behind the Intel Core i9-7940X and 0.9% behind the AMD EPYC 7272.

Specification Differences

The recorded data shows only one differing specification between the AMD EPYC 7551 and the AMD EPYC 7501, alongside their separate part numbers and benchmark results.

| Specification | AMD EPYC 7551 | AMD EPYC 7501 |

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

| TDP | 180 watts | 170 watts |

| Part number | PS7551BDVIHAF | PS7501BEVIHAF |

| Average benchmark score | 6391 | 6128 |

| Percentile vs all CPUs | 62 | 61 |

All other specifications are shared. Both processors use the AMD Socket SP3, the Zen architecture with the Naples codename, and the 14 nm process from GlobalFoundries. Both have 32 cores, 64 threads, a 2000.00 MHz base clock, and a 3.00 GHz boost clock. Both have 96 KB of L1 cache per core, 512 KB of L2 cache per core, and 64 MB of shared L3 cache. Both support DDR4 memory across an eight-channel bus with 170.6 GB/s of bandwidth, and both support ECC memory. PCIe is Gen 3 on both, and neither has integrated graphics. Both are server and workstation parts with Active production status, and both were released on the same date. The multiplier is unlocked on both processors.