AMD EPYC 7702P vs AMD EPYC 9354P Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the AMD EPYC 9354P wins every single recorded head-to-head test. Across six Cinebench workloads, the Genoa part takes all six, while the EPYC 7702P records zero wins. That does not mean the older Rome chip is useless, but it does mean the 9354P is the correct choice if raw benchmark performance is your only filter.

The 9354P's victories are consistent in magnitude. Every multicore test shows a 22% delta in its favor, and the single-core tests show the same 22% to 22.1% gap. This uniformity is striking: it suggests a generational advantage that scales across thread counts and workload types, not a narrow win in one specific area.

The 7702P does have a core-count advantage, 64 cores versus 32, and it draws less power. But the recorded data shows that advantage does not translate into a benchmark win anywhere. If you are looking for a CPU that wins Cinebench runs, the 9354P is the only option here.

For single-threaded responsiveness, the 9354P is also clearly ahead. Its Cinebench R23 single-core score of 9012 versus 7384 is a 22% advantage. That gap matters for workloads that are not fully parallel, or for systems where per-thread performance drives interactive responsiveness.

Architecture Differences

These are two different generations of AMD's EPYC line, and the architecture gap explains most of the benchmark delta.

The 9354P is Zen 4, codenamed Genoa, built on a 5 nm process at TSMC. It uses 52,560 million transistors spread across 8 dies of 72 mm² each. The 7702P is Zen 2, codenamed Rome, on a 7 nm process, with 3,800 million transistors on a single 74 mm² die. The process shrink and new microarchitecture give the 9354P a fundamental per-clock advantage.

Cache layouts differ between the two. The 9354P has 64 KB of L1 per core and 1 MB of L2 per core, with 256 MB of shared L3. The 7702P has 96 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and the same 256 MB of shared L3. So the newer chip trades larger per-core L2 for a larger L1, while keeping the same massive L3 pool.

Memory support is a major divergence. The 9354P uses DDR5 with a twelve-channel memory bus and 460.8 GB/s of bandwidth. The 7702P uses DDR4 with an eight-channel bus and 204.8 GB/s. That is more than double the memory bandwidth for the Genoa part, which matters for memory-heavy server workloads even if Cinebench does not always show it directly.

PCIe also differs. The 9354P offers Gen 5 with 128 lanes (CPU only). The 7702P offers Gen 4 without a lane count listed in the data. The newer platform also uses a different socket: SP5 for the 9354P versus SP3 for the 7702P, so they are not drop-in interchangeable.

Clock speeds tell part of the story. The 9354P has a 3.25 GHz base and 3.80 GHz boost. The 7702P has a 2.00 GHz base and 3.35 GHz boost. The 9354P runs higher at both ends, and it does so with a 280 W TDP versus 200 W for the 7702P. The 7702P's lower power envelope is a real advantage in dense deployments, but it comes with lower clocks.

Both chips support ECC memory, both have no integrated graphics, and both are unlocked multipliers. The 9354P is listed as active production, as is the 7702P. The 9354P launched in November 2022; the 7702P launched in August 2019.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head table is clean and consistent. The 9354P wins all six tests, and each win is essentially the same margin.

In Cinebench R15 multicore, the 9354P scores 6434 against 5272 for the 7702P, a 22% lead. The single-core R15 test shows 908 versus 744, also 22%.

Cinebench R20 multicore: 26812 versus 21969, again 22%. Single-core R20: 3785 versus 3101, a 22.1% margin, the largest relative gap in the entire dataset.

Cinebench R23 multicore: 63840 versus 52308, 22%. Single-core R23: 9012 versus 7384, 22%.

The consistency of the 22% delta across both single-core and multicore tests is the headline takeaway. It means the 9354P's advantage is not about core count, since the 7702P has twice as many cores. Instead, it is about per-core efficiency, memory bandwidth, and the Zen 4 architecture translating into a uniform uplift.

The 9354P's Geekbench scores are also recorded: 14214 multicore and 1605 single-core. The 7702P has no Geekbench figures in the database, so no direct comparison is possible there.

When placed against the broader CPU field, both processors sit at the 69th percentile of all CPUs. The 9354P has an average benchmark score of 15826, and the 7702P is at 15130. The 9354P's nearest rivals are the AMD EPYC 75F3 at 15859 (0.2% ahead of the 9354P), the AMD Ryzen 5 40 at 15882 (0.4% ahead), the AMD EPYC 9254 at 15756 (0.4% behind), and the Intel Core i5-11400H at 15749 (0.5% behind). The 7702P's nearest rivals are the Intel Core i3-1315U at 15022 (0.7% ahead of the 7702P), the AMD EPYC 74F3 at 14915 (1.4% ahead), the Intel Core 5 211TE at 15370 (1.6% behind), and the Intel Core i7-9750H at 14886 (1.6% ahead). These rival scores are all within a couple of percent, so neither EPYC is dramatically separated from its neighbors in the average-score ranking.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster in Cinebench R23 multicore?

A: The AMD EPYC 9354P scores 63840 versus 52308 for the 7702P, a 22% advantage.

Q: Does the 7702P's higher core count help it win any benchmark?

A: No. Despite having 64 cores versus 32, the 7702P loses all six recorded head-to-head tests. The 9354P wins every multicore and single-core Cinebench test.

Q: What is the biggest single-core gap between the two?

A: The largest relative gap is in Cinebench R20 single-core, where the 9354P leads by 22.1% (3785 versus 3101).

Q: How do the memory systems differ?

A: The 9354P uses DDR5 with twelve-channel memory and 460.8 GB/s bandwidth. The 7702P uses DDR4 with eight-channel memory and 204.8 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Are these CPUs socket-compatible?

A: No. The 9354P uses AMD Socket SP5, while the 7702P uses AMD Socket SP3.

Q: Which CPU has more L3 cache?

A: Both have 256 MB of shared L3 cache. They differ in L1 and L2: the 9354P has 64 KB L1 and 1 MB L2 per core, while the 7702P has 96 KB L1 and 512 KB L2 per core.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD EPYC 9354P | AMD EPYC 7702P |

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

| Cores | 32 | 64 |

| Threads | 64 | 128 |

| Base clock | 3.25 GHz | 2.00 GHz |

| Boost clock | 3.80 GHz | 3.35 GHz |

| TDP | 280 W | 200 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket SP5 | AMD Socket SP3 |

| Architecture | Zen 4 | Zen 2 |

| Codename | Genoa | Rome |

| Process node | 5 nm | 7 nm |

| Transistors | 52,560 million | 3,800 million |

| Die size | 8x 72 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 | 256 MB (shared) | 256 MB (shared) |

| Memory support | DDR5 | DDR4 |

| Memory bus | Twelve-channel | Eight-channel |

| Memory bandwidth | 460.8 GB/s | 204.8 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 128 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 4 |

| Release date | 2022-11-09 | 2019-08-06 |

| Launch MSRP | $2730 | Not available |

The 9354P also has a Geekbench multicore score of 14214 and single-core of 1605, while the 7702P has no Geekbench data recorded.

The Verdict

The data points in one direction. If you are choosing purely on recorded benchmark performance, the AMD EPYC 9354P is the pick. It wins every head-to-head test, and it does so by a uniform 22% margin. That consistency makes the decision easy for workloads that resemble Cinebench: rendering, simulation, and other heavily threaded compute tasks.

The 7702P's case rests on things the benchmark table does not capture. It draws 200 W versus 280 W, which matters in power-constrained racks. It has 64 cores versus 32, which can help in deployments that scale by core count rather than by per-core throughput. But the recorded data shows those 64 cores do not beat the 32 Zen 4 cores in any tested workload. The newer architecture plus higher clocks plus more than double the memory bandwidth overcomes the core deficit.

The socket difference is decisive for upgrades. A system built around SP3 cannot take the 9354P, and an SP5 board cannot take the 7702P. So the choice is also a platform choice. If you are on an existing SP3 system, the 7702P is the only one of the two that fits. If you are building new, SP5 gives you the 9354P and the DDR5, Gen 5 PCIe, and twelve-channel memory platform.

For single-threaded performance, the 9354P leads by 22% across the board. That matters for database servers, virtualization hosts, or any workload with latency-sensitive single-threaded paths. The 7702P's lower base clock of 2.00 GHz is a notable disadvantage in those scenarios.

The average benchmark score gap is smaller than the head-to-head gap: 15826 versus 15130, about 4.6% in favor of the 9354P. But that average includes the 7702P's lack of Geekbench results, so the Cinebench-specific comparison is the more reliable measure of their direct relationship.

The 9354P has a launch MSRP of $2730. The 7702P has no recorded launch price.

In practical terms: choose the 9354P for new builds where per-core speed, memory bandwidth, and modern platform features matter more than core count and power draw. Choose the 7702P if you need the higher core count for licensing models based on physical cores, if your power budget is strict, or if you are already invested in the SP3 platform. The benchmark data will not give you a reason to prefer the 7702P on performance alone, but it remains a viable part for the right deployment context.