AMD EPYC 7501 vs AMD Ryzen 3 3100U Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a fascinating contrast: the AMD Ryzen 3 3100U and the AMD EPYC 7501 land nearly identically in overall average score, yet they achieve that parity through completely different workload profiles. The Ryzen 3 3100U posts an average benchmark score of 6247, while the EPYC 7501 sits at 6128, a difference of just 1.9% in favor of the mobile chip. However, these two processors never directly compete in the same benchmark suite, so the comparison must be drawn from their individual results and nearest-rival positioning.

Starting with the Ryzen 3 3100U, the data shows a processor that excels in specific throughput tasks despite having only 2 cores and 2 threads. Its PassMark data compression score of 38455 is the standout figure, dramatically outpacing its own multithread score of 3348. This indicates the chip's architecture handles compression workloads with unusual efficiency relative to its modest core count. The integer math score of 8873 and floating-point math score of 5854 further reinforce a pattern of strong per-core computational output. In contrast, the find prime numbers score of 18 is remarkably low, suggesting this workload exposes a fundamental limitation in the Picasso architecture.

The EPYC 7501, with 32 cores and 64 threads, shows its strength in Cinebench multi-core rendering tests. The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 21186 dwarfs the R20 multicore result of 8898 and the R15 multicore score of 2135, demonstrating expected scaling across generations of the test. Its single-core Cinebench scores tell a different story: R23 single-core at 2991, R20 at 1256, and R15 at 301. These numbers reveal that while the EPYC 7501 is a server powerhouse for parallel workloads, its individual core performance is not its primary asset.

When examining nearest rivals, the Ryzen 3 3100U sits at the 62nd percentile among all CPUs, with its closest competitor being the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1950X at an average score of 6231, a delta of just 0.3%. The Intel Core i9-7940X trails by 1.6% with a score of 6147, while the AMD EPYC 7272 is 1% behind at 6186. The EPYC 7501, at the 61st percentile, finds itself in nearly the same neighborhood: the Intel Core i9-7940X leads it by 0.3% with a score of 6147, the EPYC 7272 is 0.9% ahead at 6186, and the Ryzen 3 3100U itself is 1.9% ahead with its 6247 average. This clustering of scores—all within roughly 2% of each other—suggests that for average benchmark performance, these two very different chips are effectively equivalent.

The PassMark data for the Ryzen 3 3100U shows a notable inconsistency: the single-thread score appears twice at 1592, reinforcing its reliability. The extended instructions score of 2116 and data encryption score of 1972 are modest, while random string sorting at 4666 and physics at 232 round out a profile that favors structured computational tasks over chaotic or latency-sensitive operations.

The Verdict

The verdict from the data is clear: these processors serve entirely different markets, and neither is a "better" choice in absolute terms—they are optimized for opposite ends of the computing spectrum. The Ryzen 3 3100U wins on average benchmark score by 1.9% (6247 vs 6128), placing it at the 62nd percentile versus the EPYC 7501's 61st. But this margin is negligible and misleading without context.

For users needing high-throughput multi-threaded rendering, the EPYC 7501 is the obvious pick. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 21186 demonstrates a capacity for parallel workloads that the Ryzen 3 3100U simply cannot approach—the mobile chip has no Cinebench results in the data, but its 2-core/2-thread configuration inherently limits such performance. The EPYC 7501's 32 cores and 64 threads, combined with 64 MB of shared L3 cache, make it a server or workstation processor designed for heavy sustained loads.

For users prioritizing per-core efficiency and specific compression or integer math tasks, the Ryzen 3 3100U shows surprising strength. Its data compression score of 38455 and integer math score of 8873 indicate that for certain algorithmic workloads, a modern 12nm mobile chip can outperform the older 14nm server part per-clock. The Ryzen 3 3100U's 1.9% average score advantage over the EPYC 7501, despite having 16x fewer cores, confirms its architectural efficiency.

The data does not support a blanket recommendation. The EPYC 7501 is the choice for multi-core rendering and server-class workloads, while the Ryzen 3 3100U is the choice for mobile computing with competitive per-core performance. Neither processor's nearest-rival positioning suggests a clear winner—both sit within 2% of the same cluster of competitors, including the Intel Core i9-7940X and AMD EPYC 7272.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 3100U has an average benchmark score of 6247, while the AMD EPYC 7501 scores 6128. This gives the Ryzen 3 3100U a 1.9% advantage in overall average performance.

Q: How do the two processors compare in terms of core count?

A: The EPYC 7501 has 32 cores and 64 threads, while the Ryzen 3 3100U has just 2 cores and 2 threads. This is a 16x difference in core count and a 32x difference in thread count.

Q: What is the single-thread performance difference?

A: The Ryzen 3 3100U scores 1592 in both PassMark single-thread and singlethread tests. The EPYC 7501 achieves 2991 in Cinebench R23 single-core, 1256 in R20, and 301 in R15. These are different test suites, so direct comparison is not possible from the data.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD EPYC 7501 supports ECC memory, while the AMD Ryzen 3 3100U does not. This makes the EPYC 7501 more suitable for server and workstation environments where data integrity is critical.

Q: How does the memory bandwidth compare?

A: The EPYC 7501 has a memory bandwidth of 170.6 GB/s with an eight-channel memory bus, while the Ryzen 3 3100U has 38.4 GB/s with a dual-channel bus. The EPYC 7501 offers over 4x the memory bandwidth.

Q: Which processor has a higher percentile ranking among all CPUs?

A: The Ryzen 3 3100U ranks at the 62nd percentile, while the EPYC 7501 ranks at the 61st percentile. This 1-percentile difference aligns with the 1.9% average score difference between them.

Specification Differences

The two processors diverge sharply on almost every core specification. The Ryzen 3 3100U operates with a base clock of 1.90 GHz and a boost clock of 3.20 GHz, while the EPYC 7501 has a base clock of 2000.00 MHz and a boost of 3.00 GHz. The EPYC 7501's base clock is technically higher, but the Ryzen 3 3100U boosts higher.

Power consumption differs dramatically: the Ryzen 3 3100U has a TDP of 15 watts, while the EPYC 7501 draws 170 watts—an 11x difference. The socket types are incompatible: the Ryzen 3 3100U uses AMD Socket FP5, while the EPYC 7501 uses AMD Socket SP3.

Memory specifications reveal the server orientation of the EPYC 7501. It supports ECC memory, has an eight-channel memory bus, and offers 170.6 GB/s bandwidth. The Ryzen 3 3100U lacks ECC support, uses a dual-channel bus, and provides 38.4 GB/s bandwidth. Both support DDR4 memory and PCIe Gen 3.

The Ryzen 3 3100U includes integrated Radeon Vega 8 graphics, while the EPYC 7501 has no integrated graphics. The Ryzen 3 3100U has a locked multiplier, while the EPYC 7501 has an unlocked multiplier. Their market segments differ: Mobile for the Ryzen 3 3100U and Server/Workstation for the EPYC 7501.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide is generational and foundational. The Ryzen 3 3100U is built on the Picasso codename, representing the Zen+ architecture from the 3000 series, fabricated on a 12nm process at GlobalFoundries. The EPYC 7501 uses the Naples codename with the original Zen architecture from the EPYC 7001 series, on a 14nm process, also at GlobalFoundries. The Ryzen 3 3100U's 12nm node is more advanced, while the EPYC 7501 uses the earlier 14nm node.

Transistor counts are nearly identical: the Ryzen 3 3100U has 4,940 million transistors on a 210 mm² die, while the EPYC 7501 has 4,800 million on a 213 mm² die. This similarity is remarkable given the vast core count difference, suggesting the EPYC 7501's cores are physically larger or the design dedicates more area to cache and memory controllers.

Cache hierarchies share per-core L1 (96 KB per core) and L2 (512 KB per core) configurations, but diverge at L3. The Ryzen 3 3100U has 4 MB shared L3 cache, while the EPYC 7501 has 64 MB shared L3 cache—a 16x difference that directly supports its 32-core design.

The Ryzen 3 3100U's release date is listed as 2026-05-31, while the EPYC 7501 launched on 2017-06-28. Both processors remain in active production. The Ryzen 3 3100U belongs to the Ryzen 3 generation with Zen+ (Picasso), while the EPYC 7501 belongs to the EPYC generation with Zen (Naples).

Where Each One Wins

The Ryzen 3 3100U wins in scenarios that favor its per-core efficiency and modern process node. Its data compression score of 38455 indicates exceptional performance in compression algorithms, likely benefiting from the Zen+ architecture improvements over the original Zen. Its integer math score of 8873 and floating-point math score of 5854 show strong computational throughput per core. The PassMark multithread score of 3348, while modest in absolute terms, is respectable for a 2-core part and suggests efficient thread handling. The 15-watt TDP makes it suitable for mobile devices where power efficiency is paramount.

The EPYC 7501 wins decisively in multi-core rendering and server-class parallel workloads. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 21186 demonstrates the raw power of 32 cores and 64 threads for rendering tasks. The R20 multicore score of 8898 and R15 multicore score of 2135 further confirm this dominance. The 64 MB shared L3 cache and 170.6 GB/s memory bandwidth provide the infrastructure needed for large datasets and high-concurrency operations. ECC memory support and the 170-watt TDP position it for data centers and workstation environments where reliability and throughput matter more than power efficiency.

The data shows no overlap in their victory domains: the Ryzen 3 3100U wins on per-core efficiency and specific algorithmic tasks like compression, while the EPYC 7501 wins on raw multi-core throughput and memory capacity. The nearest-rival data confirms they occupy the same average performance tier, but their architectures are optimized for opposite ends of the workload spectrum. Users should choose based on whether their workloads are latency-sensitive single-thread tasks (favoring the Ryzen 3 3100U) or throughput-intensive parallel tasks (favoring the EPYC 7501).