AMD EPYC 7542 vs AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 posts an average benchmark score of 11,469, while the AMD EPYC 7542 scores 11,152. The Ryzen 9 PRO sits in the 67th percentile of all CPUs, one point above the EPYC 7542’s 66th percentile.

Q: How many cores and threads does each processor offer?

A: The Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 has 12 cores and 24 threads. The EPYC 7542 has 32 cores and 64 threads, giving it nearly three times the core count and more than double the thread count.

Q: What is the single-core performance difference in Cinebench R23?

A: The Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 scores 5,598 in Cinebench R23 single-core, which is 2.8% ahead of the EPYC 7542’s 5,443. This margin holds consistently across all single-core tests.

Q: Does either processor support ECC memory?

A: Both the Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 and the EPYC 7542 support ECC memory. However, the Ryzen 9 PRO uses DDR5 in a dual-channel configuration, while the EPYC 7542 uses DDR4 in an eight-channel configuration.

Q: What is the process node for each chip?

A: The Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 is built on TSMC’s 5 nm process, while the EPYC 7542 uses TSMC’s 7 nm process. The Ryzen 9 PRO is the newer architecture, Zen 4, versus Zen 2 for the EPYC.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 boosts to 5.40 GHz, compared to the EPYC 7542’s 3.40 GHz. The Ryzen 9 PRO also has a higher base clock at 3.70 GHz versus 2.90 GHz.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent different generations of AMD’s server and workstation lineup. The Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 is built on Zen 4 architecture with the Raphael codename, part of the 7000 series. The EPYC 7542 uses Zen 2 architecture with the Rome codename, part of the EPYC 7002 series. This generational gap explains many of the performance differences observed in the benchmarks.

The process node difference is significant: the Ryzen 9 PRO uses a 5 nm process from TSMC, while the EPYC 7542 uses a 7 nm process. The Ryzen 9 PRO packs 13,140 million transistors across a dual-chiplet design with a die size of 2x 71 mm². The EPYC 7542 has 3,800 million transistors on a single 74 mm² die. Despite the EPYC having fewer transistors, it integrates far more cores.

Cache configurations differ substantially. The Ryzen 9 PRO provides 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 64 MB of shared L3 cache. The EPYC 7542 offers 96 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 128 MB of shared L3 cache. The EPYC’s larger L3 cache doubles the Ryzen’s capacity, which can benefit certain server workloads. However, the Ryzen’s larger per-core L2 cache may help latency-sensitive tasks.

Memory architecture is another major divergence. The Ryzen 9 PRO supports DDR5 in a dual-channel configuration with 83.2 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The EPYC 7542 supports DDR4 in an eight-channel configuration with 204.8 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The EPYC’s memory bandwidth is 2.5 times higher, a crucial factor for memory-bound server applications. The Ryzen 9 PRO also includes integrated Radeon Graphics, whereas the EPYC 7542 has no integrated graphics.

PCIe support differs as well. The Ryzen 9 PRO offers PCIe Gen 5 with 24 lanes from the CPU, while the EPYC 7542 provides PCIe Gen 4. The Ryzen’s newer PCIe standard offers higher per-lane bandwidth, though the EPYC’s platform may support more total lanes depending on the motherboard configuration.

The Verdict

The benchmark data consistently favors the Ryzen 9 PRO 7945. Across all six Cinebench tests, the Ryzen 9 PRO wins by a margin of 2.8% to 2.9%. This includes both single-core and multi-core workloads. The Ryzen 9 PRO’s winsA count is 6, while the EPYC 7542 has 0 wins.

For single-threaded performance, the Ryzen 9 PRO is clearly superior, with a 2.9% lead in Cinebench R15 single-core and a 2.8% lead in R20 and R23 single-core. This makes it the better choice for workloads that rely heavily on per-core performance, such as databases with high query rates or applications with limited thread scaling.

For multi-threaded workloads, the result is closer but still favors the Ryzen 9 PRO. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Ryzen 9 PRO scores 39,653 versus the EPYC 7542’s 38,555, a 2.8% advantage. This is notable because the EPYC has 32 cores versus the Ryzen’s 12. The Ryzen’s higher clock speeds and newer architecture compensate for the core-count disadvantage in these specific benchmarks.

The data suggests the Ryzen 9 PRO is the better all-round performer in Cinebench tests. However, the EPYC 7542 offers advantages not captured in these benchmarks: eight-channel memory with 204.8 GB/s bandwidth, double the L3 cache at 128 MB, and a much higher core count of 32. For workloads that scale across many cores and require massive memory bandwidth, the EPYC 7542 may still be the appropriate choice despite losing these specific tests.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 | AMD EPYC 7542 |

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

| Series | 7000 series | EPYC 7002 series |

| Cores | 12 | 32 |

| Threads | 24 | 64 |

| Base Clock | 3.70 GHz | 2.90 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.40 GHz | 3.40 GHz |

| TDP | 65 W | 225 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket AM5 | AMD Socket SP3 |

| Architecture | Zen 4 | Zen 2 |

| Codename | Raphael | Rome |

| Process Node | 5 nm | 7 nm |

| Transistors | 13,140 million | 3,800 million |

| Die Size | 2x 71 mm² | 74 mm² |

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

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

| L3 Cache | 64 MB (shared) | 128 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR5 | DDR4 |

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

| Memory Bandwidth | 83.2 GB/s | 204.8 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 24 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 4 |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon Graphics | None |

| Release Date | 2023-06-12 | 2019-08-06 |

| Part Number | 100-000000598 | 100-000000075 |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench R15 multi-core test shows the Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 scoring 3,996 against the EPYC 7542’s 3,886, a 2.8% lead. This is the smallest absolute gap in the multi-core tests, with the Ryzen finishing just 110 points ahead. The R15 single-core test gives the Ryzen a 2.9% advantage, scoring 564 versus 548, a 16-point margin.

Cinebench R20 multi-core results follow the same pattern. The Ryzen 9 PRO scores 16,654, while the EPYC 7542 scores 16,193. The 461-point gap represents a 2.8% difference. In R20 single-core, the Ryzen scores 2,351 against 2,286, again a 2.8% lead with a 65-point difference.

The largest absolute margin appears in Cinebench R23 multi-core. The Ryzen 9 PRO scores 39,653, while the EPYC 7542 scores 38,555, a 1,098-point gap that still translates to 2.8%. The R23 single-core test shows the Ryzen at 5,598 versus 5,443, a 155-point difference and a 2.8% lead.

Across all six tests, the Ryzen 9 PRO maintains an exceptionally consistent margin. The deltaPct values range only from 2.8% to 2.9%, indicating that the performance advantage is uniform regardless of workload type. This consistency suggests an architectural efficiency advantage rather than a test-specific quirk.

Where Each One Wins

The Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 wins in every benchmark recorded. Its strength lies in single-core performance, where it leads by 2.8% to 2.9% across R15, R20, and R23. The 5.40 GHz boost clock and Zen 4 architecture drive this advantage. For applications that cannot fully utilize many threads, such as legacy software, interactive workloads, or latency-sensitive transactions, the Ryzen 9 PRO is the clear choice.

The Ryzen 9 PRO also wins in multi-core tests despite having only 12 cores versus the EPYC’s 32. The combination of higher clocks (3.70 GHz base, 5.40 GHz boost) and the newer 5 nm process allows it to outperform the EPYC’s 32-core configuration in these Cinebench tests. Its lower TDP of 65 W versus 225 W also makes it more efficient in power-constrained environments.

The EPYC 7542 has no benchmark wins to claim, but the data shows areas where it could be preferable. Its eight-channel DDR4 memory with 204.8 GB/s bandwidth is 2.5 times higher than the Ryzen’s 83.2 GB/s. For workloads that stream large datasets, such as in-memory databases or high-performance computing simulations, this bandwidth advantage could overcome the Cinebench deficit. The EPYC also offers 128 MB of L3 cache, double the Ryzen’s 64 MB, which may help with data-heavy server workloads.

The EPYC’s 32 cores and 64 threads provide raw thread count for massively parallel workloads. While the Ryzen wins Cinebench multi-core, certain workloads with different scaling characteristics may favor the EPYC’s core count. The EPYC also uses PCIe Gen 4, while the Ryzen uses Gen 5; the newer standard may benefit the Ryzen in I/O-heavy applications, but the EPYC’s server platform may offer more expansion options.

For a workstation requiring balanced performance, the Ryzen 9 PRO is the data-backed winner. For a server prioritizing memory bandwidth and core count, the EPYC 7542’s specifications remain relevant even though it loses these specific benchmarks.