AMD EPYC 75F3 vs AMD Ryzen 3 7335U Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents an unambiguous picture: the AMD EPYC 75F3 dominates every single head-to-head comparison in the database. Across all six Cinebench tests, the EPYC 75F3 wins outright, with the Ryzen 3 7335U failing to register a single victory. The margins are staggering, consistently hovering around 412% in favor of the EPYC chip.

In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the EPYC 75F3 scores 54,829 against the Ryzen 3 7335U's 10,703, a delta of 412.3%. This is the largest absolute gap in the dataset, reflecting the massive core-count advantage. The single-core R23 result tells a similar story: 7,740 for the EPYC versus 1,511 for the Ryzen, a 412.2% lead. These are not marginal differences; they represent fundamentally different performance tiers.

The pattern holds across older Cinebench versions as well. In R20 multi-core, the EPYC scores 23,028 while the Ryzen manages 4,495, a 412.3% delta. The R20 single-core test shows 3,250 versus 634, a 412.6% lead. Even in R15, which is less demanding on modern hardware, the EPYC posts 5,526 multi-core against 1,078, a 412.6% advantage, and 780 single-core versus 152, a 413.2% edge. The consistency of these deltas across every test suggests the performance gap is structural, not workload-specific.

It is worth remembering the Ryzen 3 7335U has a higher boost clock, rated at 4.30 GHz compared to the EPYC's 4.00 GHz. Yet the EPYC still wins single-core tests by over 400%. This indicates that raw clock speed is not the determining factor here; the EPYC's architecture and memory subsystem deliver superior per-thread performance despite a lower boost ceiling. The database records no benchmark where the Ryzen 3 7335U comes close to parity, let alone takes a lead.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on different foundational designs. The EPYC 75F3 uses AMD's Zen 3 architecture under the Milan codename, fabricated on a 7 nm process at TSMC. It packs 32 cores and 64 threads into an AMD Socket SP3 package. The Ryzen 3 7335U, by contrast, uses the Zen 3+ architecture under the Rembrandt-R codename, fabricated on a 6 nm process, also at TSMC. It offers 4 cores and 8 threads on the mobile-oriented AMD Socket FP7.

The transistor counts diverge sharply. The EPYC 75F3 contains 33,200 million transistors spread across an 8-chiplet design, with each die measuring 81 mm². The Ryzen 3 7335U does not have a recorded transistor count in the database, but its die size is listed as 208 mm², indicating a monolithic design. This structural difference explains much of the performance gap: the EPYC leverages multiple chiplets to scale across 32 cores, while the Ryzen uses a single larger die for efficiency in mobile form factors.

Cache configurations further separate the two. The EPYC 75F3 offers 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and a massive 256 MB of shared L3 cache. The Ryzen 3 7335U also has 64 KB L1 per core and 512 KB L2 per core, but its L3 cache is a comparatively tiny 8 MB shared across all cores. This 32x difference in L3 capacity directly impacts multi-threaded workloads that benefit from large shared caches, such as database operations and scientific computing.

Memory support also differs fundamentally. The EPYC 75F3 uses DDR4 memory with an eight-channel bus, delivering 204.8 GB/s of bandwidth. The Ryzen 3 7335U uses DDR5 with a dual-channel bus, providing 76.8 GB/s. Both support ECC memory, which is notable for a mobile part. PCIe connectivity shows a similar gulf: the EPYC offers Gen 4 with 128 lanes (CPU only), while the Ryzen provides Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only).

The Ryzen 3 7335U includes integrated Radeon 660M graphics, while the EPYC 75F3 has no integrated graphics listed. This is expected given their market segments: the Ryzen targets mobile systems where a discrete GPU is optional, while the EPYC assumes a server platform with dedicated GPU or accelerator hardware.

Where Each One Wins

The EPYC 75F3 wins in every scenario involving heavy compute. Its 32 cores and 64 threads, combined with 256 MB of L3 cache and 204.8 GB/s memory bandwidth, make it suited for server workloads such as virtualization, large-scale data processing, and multi-tenant cloud services. The Cinebench multi-core scores, which show a 412.3% lead in R23, reflect this capability. The high TDP of 280 watts indicates it is designed for sustained operation under load, not brief bursts of activity.

The Ryzen 3 7335U, despite losing all six head-to-head benchmarks, still holds advantages in specific contexts. Its 28-watt TDP makes it suitable for thin-and-light laptops where power efficiency and thermal management are priorities. The integrated Radeon 660M graphics provide a complete solution for systems without discrete GPUs, a feature the EPYC lacks entirely. Its DDR5 memory support, while narrower in bandwidth, offers newer memory technology for mobile platforms.

In Passmark tests not included in the head-to-head comparison, the Ryzen 3 7335U shows respectable scores for a mobile chip. It records 42,493 in integer math, 24,298 in floating point math, and 146,309 in data compression. These numbers indicate it handles everyday productivity tasks, light content creation, and general-purpose computing adequately. The EPYC 75F3 does not have Passmark scores in the database, so a direct comparison in these tests is not possible, but the Cinebench results strongly suggest the EPYC would dominate in any compute-heavy scenario.

The data indicates the EPYC 75F3 is the clear choice for anyone running multi-threaded server applications. The Ryzen 3 7335U is the better fit for portable systems where battery life and size matter more than raw throughput. Neither processor is a compromise product; each excels in its intended market segment.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD EPYC 75F3 has 32 cores and 64 threads, while the AMD Ryzen 3 7335U has 4 cores and 8 threads.

Q: What is the L3 cache size difference?

A: The EPYC 75F3 has 256 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Ryzen 3 7335U has 8 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the EPYC 75F3 and the Ryzen 3 7335U support ECC memory.

Q: Which chip has integrated graphics?

A: Only the Ryzen 3 7335U has integrated graphics, specifically the Radeon 660M. The EPYC 75F3 has no integrated graphics listed.

Q: What are the memory bandwidth specifications?

A: The EPYC 75F3 offers 204.8 GB/s over an eight-channel DDR4 bus, while the Ryzen 3 7335U offers 76.8 GB/s over a dual-channel DDR5 bus.

Q: How does the boost clock compare?

A: The Ryzen 3 7335U has a higher boost clock at 4.30 GHz, compared to the EPYC 75F3's 4.00 GHz. Despite this, the EPYC wins all single-core benchmarks in the database.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD EPYC 75F3 | AMD Ryzen 3 7335U |

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

| Cores | 32 | 4 |

| Threads | 64 | 8 |

| Base Clock | 2.95 GHz | 3.00 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.00 GHz | 4.30 GHz |

| TDP | 280 W | 28 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket SP3 | AMD Socket FP7 |

| Architecture | Zen 3 | Zen 3+ |

| Codename | Milan | Rembrandt-R |

| Process Node | 7 nm | 6 nm |

| Transistors | 33,200 million | Not listed |

| Die Size | 8x 81 mm² | 208 mm² |

| L3 Cache | 256 MB (shared) | 8 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4 | DDR5 |

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

| Memory Bandwidth | 204.8 GB/s | 76.8 GB/s |

| PCIe Lanes | Gen 4, 128 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 4, 20 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | None | Radeon 660M |

| Market Segment | Server/Workstation | Mobile |

| Release Date | 2021-03-14 | 2023-01-03 |

| Launch MSRP | $4860 | Not listed |

The Verdict

The AMD EPYC 75F3 is the overwhelming choice for server and workstation deployments requiring maximum multi-threaded performance. Its 32 cores, 64 threads, 256 MB of L3 cache, and 204.8 GB/s memory bandwidth deliver a 412.3% lead over the Ryzen 3 7335U in Cinebench R23 multi-core. The 280-watt TDP signals that this processor is built for sustained, heavy workloads in data centers or professional compute environments. Its 70th percentile ranking among all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 15,859, places it in the upper tier of processors, though the nearest rivals show it is not the absolute top performer.

The AMD Ryzen 3 7335U serves a completely different purpose. As a mobile processor with a 28-watt TDP, it is designed for laptops and compact systems where power draw and heat output are critical constraints. Its 4 cores and 8 threads, along with 8 MB of L3 cache, handle everyday tasks competently. The integrated Radeon 660M graphics eliminate the need for a discrete GPU in many portable designs. Its 70th percentile ranking matches the EPYC's, but the average benchmark score of 16,827 actually exceeds the EPYC's 15,859, a quirk driven by the different benchmark suites recorded for each chip.

The verdict from the data is straightforward. If the workload is server-grade, multi-threaded, and requires massive cache and memory bandwidth, the EPYC 75F3 is the only rational pick. If the platform is a thin-and-light laptop prioritizing efficiency, portability, and integrated graphics, the Ryzen 3 7335U is the appropriate choice. Comparing them directly is like comparing a freight train to a commuter car: both are useful, but for entirely different jobs. The database shows no scenario where the Ryzen 3 7335U outperforms the EPYC 75F3 in Cinebench, and no scenario where the EPYC's power draw or socket compatibility would suit a mobile chassis. Select based on the platform, not the benchmark scores.